[Hank 91]

Watching the Stanford offense without Ty Montgomery at receiver against Cal and UCLA made me wonder about something. Why didn't it matter that Montgomery was out? Why, in fact, did the offense actually look BETTER without him? Sure, the C.al defense is laughable, but UCLA's defense is at least respectable. I think the offense was hindered through most of the season because instead of just running an offense with Montgomery as one of the receivers, they tried to force the ball to him. Instead of getting the ball to him downfield, they settled for bubble screens and reverses. Not bad plays if they're mixed in from time to time, but terrible if they represent the majority of his use.

So anyway, here's what I was thinking. What if they had decided to use Montgomery strictly as a running back this season? I know it sounds ridiculous, but he was a running back in high school, he is bigger and stronger than any of the running backs currently on the roster, and in his work in the wildcat we've seen that he can be effective running the ball between the tackles. As an added bonus, he probably would've been the best receiving running back since Brad Muster and Darin Nelson. He would be great in pass protection, and just imagine if he had been Hogan's check down option?

As we saw during the last two weeks, Cajuste, Rector, and the tight ends can hold their own without Montgomery. Imagine what they would've done with Montgomery in the backfield?

Any thoughts on this crazy idea?

[Hank 91]

Watching the Stanford offense without Ty Montgomery at receiver against Cal and UCLA made me wonder about something. Why didn't it matter that Montgomery was out? Why, in fact, did the offense actually look BETTER without him? Sure, the C.al defense is laughable, but UCLA's defense is at least respectable. I think the offense was hindered through most of the season because instead of just running an offense with Montgomery as one of the receivers, they tried to force the ball to him. Instead of getting the ball to him downfield, they settled for bubble screens and reverses. Not bad plays if they're mixed in from time to time, but terrible if they represent the majority of his use.

So anyway, here's what I was thinking. What if they had decided to use Montgomery strictly as a running back this season? I know it sounds ridiculous, but he was a running back in high school, he is bigger and stronger than any of the running backs currently on the roster, and in his work in the wildcat we've seen that he can be effective running the ball between the tackles. As an added bonus, he probably would've been the best receiving running back since Brad Muster and Darin Nelson. He would be great in pass protection, and just imagine if he had been Hogan's check down option?

As we saw during the last two weeks, Cajuste, Rector, and the tight ends can hold their own without Montgomery. Imagine what they would've done with Montgomery in the backfield?

Any thoughts on this crazy idea?

[dabigv13]

How do we know he would've been great in pass protection?

Ty is a very strong and solidly built receiver, but when I see him I see a receiver not a RB. He reminds me of Terrell Owens. I don't think he has the shiftiness or low center of gravity that a RB should have.

[dabigv13]

How do we know he would've been great in pass protection?

Ty is a very strong and solidly built receiver, but when I see him I see a receiver not a RB. He reminds me of Terrell Owens. I don't think he has the shiftiness or low center of gravity that a RB should have.

[StanFan88]

At the first Council meeting this year Ty said he played RB during high school and would love to play if the coaches would let him.

He was the wildcat back, fwiw.

I think it would have been worth giving him a shot.  The WR corps was so deep and at least early in the season the RBs were less than impressive.

Maybe we'll see more of that on Dec 30.

[StanFan88]

At the first Council meeting this year Ty said he played RB during high school and would love to play if the coaches would let him.

He was the wildcat back, fwiw.

I think it would have been worth giving him a shot.  The WR corps was so deep and at least early in the season the RBs were less than impressive.

Maybe we'll see more of that on Dec 30.

[Hank 91]

How do we know he would've been great in pass protection?

Ty is a very strong and solidly built receiver, but when I see him I see a receiver not a RB. He reminds me of Terrell Owens. I don't think he has the shiftiness or low center of gravity that a RB should have.

I assume he'd be great in pass protection because he's great at everything he does on a football field.

[Hank 91]

How do we know he would've been great in pass protection?

Ty is a very strong and solidly built receiver, but when I see him I see a receiver not a RB. He reminds me of Terrell Owens. I don't think he has the shiftiness or low center of gravity that a RB should have.

I assume he'd be great in pass protection because he's great at everything he does on a football field.

[CTcard]

Speculating on Montgomery as running back has been rather a theme this year though I am not sure where I first saw it.

He's kind of tall for the position, though it may be he could be a quality back - he's certainly a tough runner.

The main thing that strikes me as unlikely is the suggestion that this move could have been just suddenly made during the year i.e. that it wouldn't have taken any time to learn the position. We have seen plenty of position switches at Stanford, but generally those moving have not played a ton the first year at their new position.
Now maybe it would be possible at RB. I don't know how much work Miles Jack or Shaq Thompson put in before their stints at RB. On the other hand, neither stuck at the position.

There were also problems in the running game beyond the running backs themselves, though indeed the RBs were not breaking tackles much of the year. The best three running games were the last three and it seemed to be some contribution of the line playing better, Wright running tougher, and mixing in McCaffrey as RB. I guess there's a chance Montgomery could have helped the run game get there earlier, though it seems a long shot to me.

[CTcard]

Speculating on Montgomery as running back has been rather a theme this year though I am not sure where I first saw it.

He's kind of tall for the position, though it may be he could be a quality back - he's certainly a tough runner.

The main thing that strikes me as unlikely is the suggestion that this move could have been just suddenly made during the year i.e. that it wouldn't have taken any time to learn the position. We have seen plenty of position switches at Stanford, but generally those moving have not played a ton the first year at their new position.
Now maybe it would be possible at RB. I don't know how much work Miles Jack or Shaq Thompson put in before their stints at RB. On the other hand, neither stuck at the position.

There were also problems in the running game beyond the running backs themselves, though indeed the RBs were not breaking tackles much of the year. The best three running games were the last three and it seemed to be some contribution of the line playing better, Wright running tougher, and mixing in McCaffrey as RB. I guess there's a chance Montgomery could have helped the run game get there earlier, though it seems a long shot to me.

[Hulk01]

I started pushing for Ty at running back around mid-season. 

[Hulk01]

I started pushing for Ty at running back around mid-season. 

[Hurlburt88]

If you look at his career there have been a decent number of injuries . . . that is what I would worry about at RB. 

[Hurlburt88]

If you look at his career there have been a decent number of injuries . . . that is what I would worry about at RB. 

[Bruce Wang]

I started pushing for Ty at running back around mid-season.

Same.  Along the same line of reasoning as why Ryan Hewitt should have played tight end.  He's playing some tight end for the Bungles.  So yes, we had a NFL-caliber TE on the roster and didn't play him at the position where we had a desperate need and was really the only weakness in the offense.

[Bruce Wang]

I started pushing for Ty at running back around mid-season.

Same.  Along the same line of reasoning as why Ryan Hewitt should have played tight end.  He's playing some tight end for the Bungles.  So yes, we had a NFL-caliber TE on the roster and didn't play him at the position where we had a desperate need and was really the only weakness in the offense.

[Hank 91]

So what are we to make of this? Can someone with greater football knowledge please answer this question -- how difficult would the transition from receiver to running back be (or fullback to tight end, in Hewitt's case)? We talk often about the demands of learning the playbook, but that's usually for quarterbacks. Aside from the different physical demands, would it even have been realistic to think that Montgomery could've been inserted at tailback? If, for example, the coaching staff had decided two weeks ago that they wanted to feature him at tailback in the bowl game, would that be realistic?

[Hank 91]

So what are we to make of this? Can someone with greater football knowledge please answer this question -- how difficult would the transition from receiver to running back be (or fullback to tight end, in Hewitt's case)? We talk often about the demands of learning the playbook, but that's usually for quarterbacks. Aside from the different physical demands, would it even have been realistic to think that Montgomery could've been inserted at tailback? If, for example, the coaching staff had decided two weeks ago that they wanted to feature him at tailback in the bowl game, would that be realistic?

[BobK]

"We talk often about the demands of learning the playbook, but that's usually for quarterbacks."

Not true at all as explained beautifully on another site by a players parent.  Said player is not a QB.

Name a very good Running back who switched to RB from WR after age 21?  Pro or College. 

[BobK]

"We talk often about the demands of learning the playbook, but that's usually for quarterbacks."

Not true at all as explained beautifully on another site by a players parent.  Said player is not a QB.

Name a very good Running back who switched to RB from WR after age 21?  Pro or College. 

[Hank 91]

"We talk often about the demands of learning the playbook, but that's usually for quarterbacks."

Not true at all as explained beautifully on another site by a players parent.  Said player is not a QB.

Name a very good Running back who switched to RB from WR after age 21?  Pro or College.

I didn't mean learning the playbook was only demanding for quarterbacks, I was saying that we usually talk about learning the playbook in reference to quarterbacks, most notably in the Keller Chryst vs. Kevin Hogan debates. All players have to memorize the same plays, so it's possible that it would be more accurate to say that quarterbacks have to learn how to read defenses, not just learn the playbook.

[Hank 91]

"We talk often about the demands of learning the playbook, but that's usually for quarterbacks."

Not true at all as explained beautifully on another site by a players parent.  Said player is not a QB.

Name a very good Running back who switched to RB from WR after age 21?  Pro or College.

I didn't mean learning the playbook was only demanding for quarterbacks, I was saying that we usually talk about learning the playbook in reference to quarterbacks, most notably in the Keller Chryst vs. Kevin Hogan debates. All players have to memorize the same plays, so it's possible that it would be more accurate to say that quarterbacks have to learn how to read defenses, not just learn the playbook.

[stupac2]

All I know is that there's a reason it didn't happen. Maybe they tried it in practice and Montgomery just wasn't very good at it, but since he plays the wildcat that seems unlikely. Maybe his value as a receiver (even if it's just occupying the opposing team's attention, freeing up Cajuste et al) was deemed too valuable to permanently move him. We can't really know what the reason was without asking, and we can't even know if it was considered.

The thing is, I'm not convinced at all that this would have been useful. Wasn't our YPC actually pretty good this year? Toward the end of the year Young showed that he could successfully run between the tackles, I remember a number of Gaffney-esque gains out of jumbo sets. Wright showed he could be an every-down back. Would Montgomery actually have done better? Maybe, the Wildcat did have a pretty good average if you ignore that one bad snap, but I don't think the evidence is really there.

Maybe someone in the media will ask about this, they do seem to follow our lead on occasion.

[stupac2]

All I know is that there's a reason it didn't happen. Maybe they tried it in practice and Montgomery just wasn't very good at it, but since he plays the wildcat that seems unlikely. Maybe his value as a receiver (even if it's just occupying the opposing team's attention, freeing up Cajuste et al) was deemed too valuable to permanently move him. We can't really know what the reason was without asking, and we can't even know if it was considered.

The thing is, I'm not convinced at all that this would have been useful. Wasn't our YPC actually pretty good this year? Toward the end of the year Young showed that he could successfully run between the tackles, I remember a number of Gaffney-esque gains out of jumbo sets. Wright showed he could be an every-down back. Would Montgomery actually have done better? Maybe, the Wildcat did have a pretty good average if you ignore that one bad snap, but I don't think the evidence is really there.

Maybe someone in the media will ask about this, they do seem to follow our lead on occasion.

[needle]

Tavon Austin, West Virginia's career leader in receiving yards, once had a pretty epic game a couple of years ago against Oklahoma.

Primarily lining up at running back, Austin piled up 572 all-purpose yards against Oklahoma for the second-highest single-game total in NCAA history. He rushed for 344 yards and two touchdowns, caught four passes for 82 yards and gained 146 yards on eight kick returns.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-02...ock-drafts

It certainly could have been tried, but I think Shaw and staff wanted to emphasize the passing game at the beginning of the year, so taking a very good player away from that would have seemed counterintuitive to their plan for the offense.

[needle]

Tavon Austin, West Virginia's career leader in receiving yards, once had a pretty epic game a couple of years ago against Oklahoma.

Primarily lining up at running back, Austin piled up 572 all-purpose yards against Oklahoma for the second-highest single-game total in NCAA history. He rushed for 344 yards and two touchdowns, caught four passes for 82 yards and gained 146 yards on eight kick returns.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-02...ock-drafts

It certainly could have been tried, but I think Shaw and staff wanted to emphasize the passing game at the beginning of the year, so taking a very good player away from that would have seemed counterintuitive to their plan for the offense.

[Hulk01]

Shag Richardson and Myles Jack, both of them LBs, have made nice impacts as running backs for Washington and UCLA over the last year.  And the number of true freshmen who have made impacts at RB--Nick Wilson at Arizona and Royce Freeman at Oregon this year alone--suggests that it's a much easier playbook to master for an RB. 

But my favorite case of near-overnight running backs is our truly overnight RB from 1971. It's Stanford against USC in the Coliseum, a game beamed back to Maples via closed circuit TV to a brobdingnagian Stanford crowd.  Ralston brings us on out in the USC I formation with WR John Wineseberry at tailback, and overwhelms the Trojans with Tailback Right and Left all night.  I'd guess that John had at least 80 yards at halftime.

The team then moved Winesberry back to wide receiver and proceeded to, and won, the Rose Bowl with Jackie Brown at RB.

[Hulk01]

Shag Richardson and Myles Jack, both of them LBs, have made nice impacts as running backs for Washington and UCLA over the last year.  And the number of true freshmen who have made impacts at RB--Nick Wilson at Arizona and Royce Freeman at Oregon this year alone--suggests that it's a much easier playbook to master for an RB. 

But my favorite case of near-overnight running backs is our truly overnight RB from 1971. It's Stanford against USC in the Coliseum, a game beamed back to Maples via closed circuit TV to a brobdingnagian Stanford crowd.  Ralston brings us on out in the USC I formation with WR John Wineseberry at tailback, and overwhelms the Trojans with Tailback Right and Left all night.  I'd guess that John had at least 80 yards at halftime.

The team then moved Winesberry back to wide receiver and proceeded to, and won, the Rose Bowl with Jackie Brown at RB.

[Redrum]

(sorry)

[Redrum]

(sorry)

[CrazedZooChimp]

"We talk often about the demands of learning the playbook, but that's usually for quarterbacks."

Not true at all as explained beautifully on another site by a players parent.  Said player is not a QB.

Name a very good Running back who switched to RB from WR after age 21?  Pro or College.

Does Percy Harvin count?  I'm not sure when or if he actually really switched, but he basically plays both positions and for his junior year Meyer officially listed him as a RB instead of a WR.  In the NFL I think he's sort of gone back and forth between the two positions.

[CrazedZooChimp]

"We talk often about the demands of learning the playbook, but that's usually for quarterbacks."

Not true at all as explained beautifully on another site by a players parent.  Said player is not a QB.

Name a very good Running back who switched to RB from WR after age 21?  Pro or College.

Does Percy Harvin count?  I'm not sure when or if he actually really switched, but he basically plays both positions and for his junior year Meyer officially listed him as a RB instead of a WR.  In the NFL I think he's sort of gone back and forth between the two positions.

[Hulk01]

You know more, Garvin.  I apparently didn't check the stats for those first two games, and saw only the home games plus the close circuit of USC.  And as effective as Winesberry was against USC, I can see Ralston's desire to have both Brown and John on the field at the same time.

Which leads to the question: Was Brown hurt before the SC game?  Did he play in that game at all?

[Hulk01]

You know more, Garvin.  I apparently didn't check the stats for those first two games, and saw only the home games plus the close circuit of USC.  And as effective as Winesberry was against USC, I can see Ralston's desire to have both Brown and John on the field at the same time.

Which leads to the question: Was Brown hurt before the SC game?  Did he play in that game at all?

[81alum]

You know more, Garvin.  I apparently didn't check the stats for those first two games, and saw only the home games plus the close circuit of U$€.  And as effective as Winesberry was against U$€, I can see Ralston's desire to have both Brown and John on the field at the same time.

Which leads to the question: Was Brown hurt before the SC game?  Did he play in that game at all?

For that matter, where does one go to get game by game statistics prior to the late 1990s in either football or basketball?  The stats at GoStanford for both sports seem to start in the late 1990s, which I presume is when the website started.

[81alum]

You know more, Garvin.  I apparently didn't check the stats for those first two games, and saw only the home games plus the close circuit of U$€.  And as effective as Winesberry was against U$€, I can see Ralston's desire to have both Brown and John on the field at the same time.

Which leads to the question: Was Brown hurt before the SC game?  Did he play in that game at all?

For that matter, where does one go to get game by game statistics prior to the late 1990s in either football or basketball?  The stats at GoStanford for both sports seem to start in the late 1990s, which I presume is when the website started.

[CTcard]

For that matter, where does one go to get game by game statistics prior to the late 1990s in either football or basketball?  The stats at GoStanford for both sports seem to start in the late 1990s, which I presume is when the website started.

This is the best site I know about (linked on the 1971 page).
http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/scho.../1971.html

Winesberry had 43 carries for 197 yards on the year.
Unfortunately, they don't have game box scores.

[CTcard]

For that matter, where does one go to get game by game statistics prior to the late 1990s in either football or basketball?  The stats at GoStanford for both sports seem to start in the late 1990s, which I presume is when the website started.

This is the best site I know about (linked on the 1971 page).
http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/scho.../1971.html

Winesberry had 43 carries for 197 yards on the year.
Unfortunately, they don't have game box scores.