[thunder_chik]

[quote author=StanFan88 link=topic=10789.msg100927#msg100927 date=1412518012]
I would like to see a gameplan that emphasizes Hogan's strengths or a QB who can execute the current gameplan better.  The mismatch is driving me nuts.

I'm not trying to be sarcastic, but what strengths are those?  He's not accurate, he stares down his receivers, he takes a long time to unwind, he doesn't appear to have audible genius in him, he's not a great runner....
[/quote]

In all fairness, there were more than a few dropped passes that could/should have been snagged yesterday.  Also, Hogan isn't bad as a runner (TD run).  Give him a little credit (TV guys didn't; one said "Golson's fumble propelled Hogan into the end zone".  Actually, I think Hogan propelled Hogan into the end zone!).

Did anyone else note the segment where the TV commentators spent time criticizing his throwing motion, verbally and visually? So there's that, too.

As an aside, the commentators were awful.  They even made fun of our Tree mascot!

We not only lost the game, we lost a big opportunity to move up in the standings.

[thunder_chik]

[quote author=StanFan88 link=topic=10789.msg100927#msg100927 date=1412518012]
I would like to see a gameplan that emphasizes Hogan's strengths or a QB who can execute the current gameplan better.  The mismatch is driving me nuts.

I'm not trying to be sarcastic, but what strengths are those?  He's not accurate, he stares down his receivers, he takes a long time to unwind, he doesn't appear to have audible genius in him, he's not a great runner....
[/quote]

In all fairness, there were more than a few dropped passes that could/should have been snagged yesterday.  Also, Hogan isn't bad as a runner (TD run).  Give him a little credit (TV guys didn't; one said "Golson's fumble propelled Hogan into the end zone".  Actually, I think Hogan propelled Hogan into the end zone!).

Did anyone else note the segment where the TV commentators spent time criticizing his throwing motion, verbally and visually? So there's that, too.

As an aside, the commentators were awful.  They even made fun of our Tree mascot!

We not only lost the game, we lost a big opportunity to move up in the standings.

[Mick]

As an aside, the commentators were awful.  They even made fun of our Tree mascot!

Two thoughts.  First, if you're going to kvetch, do a little research.  The tree is the band's mascot, not that of the University or the  team.

And second, but completely OT...I've always thought that Krukow and Kuiper were like a fine old bottle of scotch.  I listened to the FS1 announcers (Matt Vasgersian and John Smoltz) do the Giants game yesterday...Two Buck Chuck and Ripple.  Ugh.

[Mick]

As an aside, the commentators were awful.  They even made fun of our Tree mascot!

Two thoughts.  First, if you're going to kvetch, do a little research.  The tree is the band's mascot, not that of the University or the  team.

And second, but completely OT...I've always thought that Krukow and Kuiper were like a fine old bottle of scotch.  I listened to the FS1 announcers (Matt Vasgersian and John Smoltz) do the Giants game yesterday...Two Buck Chuck and Ripple.  Ugh.

[thunder_chik]

Mick, I marched with the Band, so I know about the Tree and Dollies.  I was using "our" in a very broad sense.  The announcers for the national broadcast were obviously clueless about the mascot situation and even admitted not "getting it."

[thunder_chik]

Mick, I marched with the Band, so I know about the Tree and Dollies.  I was using "our" in a very broad sense.  The announcers for the national broadcast were obviously clueless about the mascot situation and even admitted not "getting it."

[Stymie]

For those statmeisters who are confident that freshmen quarterbacks ar a no-no, just look across the bay at Goff.  Thrown into the meat grinder as a frosh last year, but survived and now leads an offense that dwarfs ours in production.  Is that good?  No, it ain't!

I do not think I can bear another year and 1/2 with Hogan at the helm.  Chryst, or even Burns can't really be any worse than oor Kevin (and who knows what either of the tgwo are doing to build their skills this year, given that Coach Shaw doesn't tell us, and relies on "the Crower package" to fumble about in garbage time).

Given our overall talent, I think we could gamble with inserting Chryst as per the insertion of Hogan mid-year 2012.  The more I watch Hogan, the more I pine for Nunes......

[Stymie]

For those statmeisters who are confident that freshmen quarterbacks ar a no-no, just look across the bay at Goff.  Thrown into the meat grinder as a frosh last year, but survived and now leads an offense that dwarfs ours in production.  Is that good?  No, it ain't!

I do not think I can bear another year and 1/2 with Hogan at the helm.  Chryst, or even Burns can't really be any worse than oor Kevin (and who knows what either of the tgwo are doing to build their skills this year, given that Coach Shaw doesn't tell us, and relies on "the Crower package" to fumble about in garbage time).

Given our overall talent, I think we could gamble with inserting Chryst as per the insertion of Hogan mid-year 2012.  The more I watch Hogan, the more I pine for Nunes......

[washingtonismoney]

I do not think I can 59er another year and 1/2 with Hogan at the helm.  Chryst, or even Burns can't really be any worse than oor Kevin (and who knows what either of the tgwo are doing to build their skills this year, given that Coach Shaw doesn't tell us, and relies on "the Crower package" to fumble about in garbage time).

Of course they can be worse. Indeed, the vast majority of true freshman QBs are worse than Hogan. Why would we expect Chryst to be different? (And if Burns were so good, he'd probably be ahead of Crower by this point.)

[washingtonismoney]

I do not think I can 59er another year and 1/2 with Hogan at the helm.  Chryst, or even Burns can't really be any worse than oor Kevin (and who knows what either of the tgwo are doing to build their skills this year, given that Coach Shaw doesn't tell us, and relies on "the Crower package" to fumble about in garbage time).

Of course they can be worse. Indeed, the vast majority of true freshman QBs are worse than Hogan. Why would we expect Chryst to be different? (And if Burns were so good, he'd probably be ahead of Crower by this point.)

[martyup]

I blame the failure of our run game for this loss.

[martyup]

I blame the failure of our run game for this loss.

[Stymie]

[quote author=Stymie link=topic=10789.msg100959#msg100959 date=1412525835]
I do not think I can 59er another year and 1/2 with Hogan at the helm.  Chryst, or even Burns can't really be any worse than oor Kevin (and who knows what either of the tgwo are doing to build their skills this year, given that Coach Shaw doesn't tell us, and relies on "the Crower package" to fumble about in garbage time).

Of course they can be worse. Indeed, the vast majority of true freshman QBs are worse than Hogan. Why would we expect Chryst to be different? (And if Burns were so good, he'd probably be ahead of Crower by this point.)
[/quote]

....or, maybe Shaw is so risk averse and control freakish that he would never think of promoting talent vs. comfort...

[Stymie]

[quote author=Stymie link=topic=10789.msg100959#msg100959 date=1412525835]
I do not think I can 59er another year and 1/2 with Hogan at the helm.  Chryst, or even Burns can't really be any worse than oor Kevin (and who knows what either of the tgwo are doing to build their skills this year, given that Coach Shaw doesn't tell us, and relies on "the Crower package" to fumble about in garbage time).

Of course they can be worse. Indeed, the vast majority of true freshman QBs are worse than Hogan. Why would we expect Chryst to be different? (And if Burns were so good, he'd probably be ahead of Crower by this point.)
[/quote]

....or, maybe Shaw is so risk averse and control freakish that he would never think of promoting talent vs. comfort...

[washingtonismoney]

....or, maybe Shaw is so risk averse and control freakish that he would never think of promoting talent vs. comfort...

sure, aside from Hogan over Nunes, Carter over Browning, Peat over the other offensive linemen, Montgomery over Patterson, and so on.

Given that the last thing we saw of Burns was him fumbling a snap -- after a spring game in which he barely appeared able to field one -- I'm going to guess the problem is Burns's. (Yes, maybe he should be developed better than that but not relevant at this juncture.)

At any rate, nonresponsive to my overall point, which is that:
a) true freshman QBs almost always stink, unless they're average.
b) true freshman QBs rarely develop
c) at any rate, we know Hogan can play a good bit above average, so what's the point?

Has nothing to do with whether Shaw is conservative or not.

[washingtonismoney]

....or, maybe Shaw is so risk averse and control freakish that he would never think of promoting talent vs. comfort...

sure, aside from Hogan over Nunes, Carter over Browning, Peat over the other offensive linemen, Montgomery over Patterson, and so on.

Given that the last thing we saw of Burns was him fumbling a snap -- after a spring game in which he barely appeared able to field one -- I'm going to guess the problem is Burns's. (Yes, maybe he should be developed better than that but not relevant at this juncture.)

At any rate, nonresponsive to my overall point, which is that:
a) true freshman QBs almost always stink, unless they're average.
b) true freshman QBs rarely develop
c) at any rate, we know Hogan can play a good bit above average, so what's the point?

Has nothing to do with whether Shaw is conservative or not.

[Stymie]

WIM

If you really believe that Hogan is "a good bit above the average," you must be comparing him to all college QB's including Amherst, Chico State, etc.  If however, you are comparing him to the QBs of the 25-50 college football programs that aspire like us to some sort of "greatness," you are not paying attention.

Stymie

[Stymie]

WIM

If you really believe that Hogan is "a good bit above the average," you must be comparing him to all college QB's including Amherst, Chico State, etc.  If however, you are comparing him to the QBs of the 25-50 college football programs that aspire like us to some sort of "greatness," you are not paying attention.

Stymie

[Trevmiesterj]

WIM

If you really believe that Hogan is "a good bit above the average," you must be comparing him to all college QB's including Amherst, Chico State, etc.

Stymie

Well, I am certain that Hogan is more than a good bit above the average if you factor in the Chico State QB because Chico ended their college football program in '97.

[Trevmiesterj]

WIM

If you really believe that Hogan is "a good bit above the average," you must be comparing him to all college QB's including Amherst, Chico State, etc.

Stymie

Well, I am certain that Hogan is more than a good bit above the average if you factor in the Chico State QB because Chico ended their college football program in '97.

[Stymie]

[quote author=Stymie link=topic=10789.msg100992#msg100992 date=1412536841]
WIM

If you really believe that Hogan is "a good bit above the average," you must be comparing him to all college QB's including Amherst, Chico State, etc.

Stymie

Well, I am certain that Hogan is more than a good bit above the average if you factor in the Chico State QB because Chico ended their college football program in '97.
[/quote]

I did take that into account, Trevmeister, when computing my averages.

[Stymie]

[quote author=Stymie link=topic=10789.msg100992#msg100992 date=1412536841]
WIM

If you really believe that Hogan is "a good bit above the average," you must be comparing him to all college QB's including Amherst, Chico State, etc.

Stymie

Well, I am certain that Hogan is more than a good bit above the average if you factor in the Chico State QB because Chico ended their college football program in '97.
[/quote]

I did take that into account, Trevmeister, when computing my averages.

[Trevmiesterj]

[quote author=Trevmiesterj link=topic=10789.msg100996#msg100996 date=1412537401]
[quote author=Stymie link=topic=10789.msg100992#msg100992 date=1412536841]
WIM

If you really believe that Hogan is "a good bit above the average," you must be comparing him to all college QB's including Amherst, Chico State, etc.

Stymie

Well, I am certain that Hogan is more than a good bit above the average if you factor in the Chico State QB because Chico ended their college football program in '97.
[/quote]

I did take that into account, Trevmeister, when computing my averages.
[/quote]

I should have considered that as a possibility.  No stone left unturned....

[Trevmiesterj]

[quote author=Trevmiesterj link=topic=10789.msg100996#msg100996 date=1412537401]
[quote author=Stymie link=topic=10789.msg100992#msg100992 date=1412536841]
WIM

If you really believe that Hogan is "a good bit above the average," you must be comparing him to all college QB's including Amherst, Chico State, etc.

Stymie

Well, I am certain that Hogan is more than a good bit above the average if you factor in the Chico State QB because Chico ended their college football program in '97.
[/quote]

I did take that into account, Trevmeister, when computing my averages.
[/quote]

I should have considered that as a possibility.  No stone left unturned....

[StanFan88]

I blame the failure of our run game for this loss.

I blame the failure of the offensive coaches to develop a gameplan that takes advantage of their strengths - for the third game this season.

[StanFan88]

I blame the failure of our run game for this loss.

I blame the failure of the offensive coaches to develop a gameplan that takes advantage of their strengths - for the third game this season.

[ChicagoCard]

Here is a Stanford Daily article from late last week on Hogan by Joseph Beyda. He argues that Shaw is calculating that Hogan will gain confidence and therefore improve this season. What about that?

[ChicagoCard]

Here is a Stanford Daily article from late last week on Hogan by Joseph Beyda. He argues that Shaw is calculating that Hogan will gain confidence and therefore improve this season. What about that?

[StanFan88]

Here is a Stanford Daily article from late last week on Hogan by Joseph Beyda. He argues that Shaw is calculating that Hogan will gain confidence and therefore improve this season. What about that?

I think 3 games is enough to know whether that is going to happen.

[StanFan88]

Here is a Stanford Daily article from late last week on Hogan by Joseph Beyda. He argues that Shaw is calculating that Hogan will gain confidence and therefore improve this season. What about that?

I think 3 games is enough to know whether that is going to happen.

[teejers1]

1.  Until we know who calls the plays, how can we assign "blame" for the bad-to-mediocre offense we've seen the past 3 years?

2.  I do know this:  Shaw holds that play card in front of him and seems to be on the headsets talking all the time while the offense has the ball.  I would like to see one game where he completely STAYS OUT OF THE PLAY CALLING MIX.  Just let the OC make the calls all game for once, and let's see how it plays out.  [BTW, I agree 100% with OutsiderFan that the telegraphing by Hogan to his intended receiver is only matched by the play-tipping Stanford does far too often on offense.  When #7 lines up in the backfield, do you think he is going to get the ball?].

3.  I also know that Shaw has been the head man for 3 years, and is ultimately responsible for what we've seen under this regime (which is a GREAT defense coupled with a BAD offense).  Shaw knows what is going on game-day, and it needs to change.  NOW.

4. The reason why the O gets the blame for the L on Saturday is because even a great D cannot reasonably be expected to contain an opposing offense when they are on the field the entire day.  I read where Stanford had 8 3-and-outs on offense Saturday.  That is ridiculously bad, and takes a toll on the D that, not shockingly, buckled at game's end.

[teejers1]

1.  Until we know who calls the plays, how can we assign "blame" for the bad-to-mediocre offense we've seen the past 3 years?

2.  I do know this:  Shaw holds that play card in front of him and seems to be on the headsets talking all the time while the offense has the ball.  I would like to see one game where he completely STAYS OUT OF THE PLAY CALLING MIX.  Just let the OC make the calls all game for once, and let's see how it plays out.  [BTW, I agree 100% with OutsiderFan that the telegraphing by Hogan to his intended receiver is only matched by the play-tipping Stanford does far too often on offense.  When #7 lines up in the backfield, do you think he is going to get the ball?].

3.  I also know that Shaw has been the head man for 3 years, and is ultimately responsible for what we've seen under this regime (which is a GREAT defense coupled with a BAD offense).  Shaw knows what is going on game-day, and it needs to change.  NOW.

4. The reason why the O gets the blame for the L on Saturday is because even a great D cannot reasonably be expected to contain an opposing offense when they are on the field the entire day.  I read where Stanford had 8 3-and-outs on offense Saturday.  That is ridiculously bad, and takes a toll on the D that, not shockingly, buckled at game's end.

[needle]

  I read where Stanford had 8 3-and-outs on offense Saturday.  That is ridiculously bad, and takes a toll on the D that, not shockingly, buckled at game's end.

I don't disagree with you, but I was surprised in looking at the box score to learn that Stanford had a (very) slight edge in time of possession, 30:12 to 29:48.

Also, the NBC commercial breaks seemed to me to be a bit more than a normal telecast. Not sure I'm right about last part, but it might have helped the defense a tiny bit.

[needle]

  I read where Stanford had 8 3-and-outs on offense Saturday.  That is ridiculously bad, and takes a toll on the D that, not shockingly, buckled at game's end.

I don't disagree with you, but I was surprised in looking at the box score to learn that Stanford had a (very) slight edge in time of possession, 30:12 to 29:48.

Also, the NBC commercial breaks seemed to me to be a bit more than a normal telecast. Not sure I'm right about last part, but it might have helped the defense a tiny bit.

[OutsiderFan]

I know this won't be popular, but there are several strong parallels between David Shaw and Jeff Tedford:

1. A belief in schemes over players just making plays
2. Levels of complexity that are difficult for college offenses and QBs in particular to assimilate given limited practice time
3. Too involved in the offense as head coach
4. Very poor clock management
5. Won't go for it on 4th down enough

To me the parallels end there, because Shaw has so many more positive traits than Tedford ever had, and doesn't have the other ones that pulled Tedford into the abyss.

[OutsiderFan]

I know this won't be popular, but there are several strong parallels between David Shaw and Jeff Tedford:

1. A belief in schemes over players just making plays
2. Levels of complexity that are difficult for college offenses and QBs in particular to assimilate given limited practice time
3. Too involved in the offense as head coach
4. Very poor clock management
5. Won't go for it on 4th down enough

To me the parallels end there, because Shaw has so many more positive traits than Tedford ever had, and doesn't have the other ones that pulled Tedford into the abyss.

[stupac2]

Shaw only calls red zone plays, right? Seems to me that's a lot less involved that Tedford was.

I'm waiting to see if he brings in some outside help on the offensive side this offseason. If he doesn't then I'll start worrying.

[stupac2]

Shaw only calls red zone plays, right? Seems to me that's a lot less involved that Tedford was.

I'm waiting to see if he brings in some outside help on the offensive side this offseason. If he doesn't then I'll start worrying.

[washingtonismoney]

Well, of course, speaking of Tedford -- he, too, wasn't shy about bringing in outside help. That didn't turn out too well, either.

[washingtonismoney]

Well, of course, speaking of Tedford -- he, too, wasn't shy about bringing in outside help. That didn't turn out too well, either.