Stanford D, a discussion thread.

[CanesAreAble]

Ok, so I took the painstaking time to research stanford's defense out of sheer curiosity after the USC game. Their relentless play and poise in that game struck a cord in me. Yeah i had seen a few stanford games last year, and was impressed by them then, but not at the level I was saturday. Here are the things that stood out for me:

1) they have - starting - at least 6 seniors. Makes a huge difference.
2) However, these guys are not blue chip AA. In fact the only guys that had "legit offers" were Henry Anderson (DE) Junior, and Terrence Stephens (NG) Senior. Everyone else, was at most a Three star. Heck they had a couple "NR" (Not Ranked) and a few Two Stars.
3) Defensive coaches. This struck me as unusual. In 2011 they had co-defensive coordinators (Jason Tarver and Derek Mason). After his first and only season as a DC, Jason Tarver left to coach in the NFL. That left Derek Mason. It would be splitting hairs to say Jason Tarver was the actual brains of the operation because he was the one plucked to the league. But oddly enough, last year, it too was Derek Mason's first year as a DC. Fact is, that last year Standford's defense ranked 28 in total defense (miami 45 - not that far off). This year, through three games, stanford ranks 31, and we are not in the top 50. Three games will not make anyone coach of the year. But this is only the second year under the same defense. (side fact, their DL coach has ONLY coached dline since 1973 from ohio st to notre dame, etc..I mention this because i know there is a growing resentment of our dline coach, and he has been there since the 2010 season). The difference i believe is that they have continuity in the players. All these kids were mature juniors able to grasp the 3-4 defense and are now playing well under it for their second year. That is huge.

I am simply sharing info. I know our situation is a bit different in that although we have some kids in their second year in the defense, we have mostly first-timers, and young first timers at that. The other thing i wanted to take away from this was that all these mid-tier kids (at best) rocked a stacked blue-chip high octane offense, two years in a row. I am a "star-*****". I admit it. I believe there is something to getting a ton of blue-chippers (see alabama). But i also believe that coaching, development is the key to it all (for the antithesis see Texas). So, is Stanford hitting so well on all their coaching hires that in two years they developed average-at best kids into a pretty good team? Let me be on the record as saying I DON"T WANT TO BE STANDFORD. I want to be alabama. But my point is why can they do more with seemingly less, and our defensive staff can't? AS much as this season hurts, I think the real tale will be next year. IF this team is not a jauggernaut in 2013, then changes need to be made. I would give our defensive coordinator till then. I am giving the benefit of the doubt. Because what I saw from stanford's D as far as looks, stunts, mixing blitzes, one guy with his hands down on the line while others stood, etc...I am yet to remotely see from our team, and again this is year two for both the system and the DC at that school.

Thought i'd share these thoughts.

I think you're going to be disappointed. In order for our defense to be ANY good next year, we're going to have to hit bingo on a couple of JUCO/ Prep kids. Incoming freshmen along the DL, particularly at DT, just aren't ready physically, mentally, and usually from a skillset standpoint when they hit campus. If you get anything from a frosh DLineman, consider it gravy.

I don't think you're going to see a world-beating defense at Miami for another 2, possibly 3, years simply because we're so behind at DT.

If the 7 D-linemen that we recruited last year are ready to be rotation guys next year, I think we could be decent up front next year. Not great, but not a sieve, either. And the back 7 should actually be quite good.

I think we're 2-3 years away from having a GREAT defense, but next year has the potential to be pretty good.

 

[wushah]

...and it's Stanford fellas not Standford.

 

[3FW]

My guess is this is a game where we will try and impose our will in the running game.

 

[CaneAlmighty]

Vic Fangio who served as Stanford's DC for the 2010 season deserves credit for what you are seeing now.
Before him, Stanford was a fixture in the bottom run of defensive rankings.
Fangio changed to scheme from a 4-3 to 3-4 to better utilize Stanfords players. That year Stanford was a top 20 defense on their way to a 12 win season. Having Luck helps but their 2010 defense was pretty solid.
When Harbaugh left for the NFL he took Vic with him the the 49'ers where both are dominating the league.
Stanfords current DC is basically continuing what Harbaugh and Fangio started.
Harbaugh built up the talent level and developed the culture for the long term. Watch how Stanford will begin to regress once this veteran defense begins to graduate.

So be patient, Stanford is an excellent example of what happens when a coach builds a program the right way.
The 1st 3 years of Harbaugh's tenure at Stanford was marked by bottom of rung defensive teams. Then in year 4 with the right mix of players, culture and coaching, they improved to a Top 20 defense.

The only variable here of course is the DC. I think it's to early to tell right now.
Stanford's defense would have still been bad 2 years into Harbaughs tenure with Fangio coaching them.

 

[Awsi Dooger]

I bet Stanford all the time, and have since becoming fascinated with the program following the famous upset of USC as 41 point underdogs several years ago. Something special was going on there, to allow an unprecedented result like that.

I don't claim to follow their schemes closely but I do remember the big picture details. If you had to compare Stanford's defense at any point to current Miami, I would identify 2009. Luck was in his first year as starter but the defense was a relatively passive 4-3 with erratic results. They had some very poor efforts including gashed on the ground in the first half at Wake Forest, falling too far behind. Oregon State and Cal also upset Stanford while racking up big numbers. Late in the season the rush defense improved but Stanford was vulnerable against the pass, and forced to try to outscore everybody.

The following year was the exponential leap. Stanford switched to a penetrating attacking 3-4 under new coordinator Vic Fangio, a long term NFL assistant. The players studied the Ravens' schemes throughout the offseason, obviously with the help of Harbaugh's brother. Every time I read an article or watched an online video the Stanford defenders emphasized how thrilled they were at the switch to the 3-4 and the attacking freedom it unleashed. Granted, it helped that Skov was coming of age, after a relatively slow start to his career. He thrived in the 3-4 and was dominant at the end of the season, along with Chase Thomas, and particularly in the Orange Bowl when Stanford battered Virginia Tech.

Oregon gave Stanford fits in 2010, and really every season. They don't match up well against all that speed from every angle. One play is blown up then the next one bursts through a gaping hole. Stanford led 21-3 at Oregon in 2010 then was non-competitive in the second half. I expect this season could be ugly at Eugene as well. This thread likely wouldn't exist if Stanford faced Oregon prior to playing USC.

When Fangio left with Harbaugh to the 49ers, Stanford named co-coordinators for 2011, as mentioned in the OP. They really didn't try to change much. Only one starting lineman returned but the depth appeared superior. The priority was shedding blocks and destroying the run. Then Skov got hurt against Arizona...out for the season. Devastating. They tried to pretend it could be covered, that the program had reached a level to withstand a loss like that. But you knew better. For the remainder of 2011 Stanford was like a bully team, able to dominate the weak offenses on effort and smarts alone, but no match for top attacks. They were very fortunate to escape USC, then Oregon jumped on them early and didn't relent, and obviously the Oklahoma State bowl game should have been won but the defense, which made Weeden look bad early, couldn't slow Weeden or Blackmon every time it mattered.

Fast forward to 2012. Skov returns, along with virtually everyone else in the front seven. Their theme is, "party in the backfield." Multiple looks but sharing an attacking frenzy. How unfamiliar is that, from a recent Canes perspective? Disgusting. Sometimes I dig out the old tapes to reminisce. Stanford had to replace the safeties, but the newcomers have been surprisingly effective. The loss of Luck necessitates an even more physical approach on offense, which cleanses the defense and further stamps team identity. Put Fisch in charge of Stanford's offense and the defense likely would show signs of decay within weeks. USC's key injury at center allowed that game to avalanche late, making Stanford appear more dominant than they really are. USC's current style played into Stanford's hands to begin with, abusing the parallel screens with no real emphasis on running the football with any conviction.

 

[Larry]

Vic Fangio just gets it.

 

[Awsi Dooger]

Vic Fangio who served as Stanford's DC for the 2010 season deserves credit for what you are seeing now.
Before him, Stanford was a fixture in the bottom run of defensive rankings.
Fangio changed to scheme from a 4-3 to 3-4 to better utilize Stanfords players. That year Stanford was a top 20 defense on their way to a 12 win season. Having Luck helps but their 2010 defense was pretty solid.
When Harbaugh left for the NFL he took Vic with him the the 49'ers where both are dominating the league.
Stanfords current DC is basically continuing what Harbaugh and Fangio started.
Harbaugh built up the talent level and developed the culture for the long term. Watch how Stanford will begin to regress once this veteran defense begins to graduate.

So be patient, Stanford is an excellent example of what happens when a coach builds a program the right way.
The 1st 3 years of Harbaugh's tenure at Stanford was marked by bottom of rung defensive teams. Then in year 4 with the right mix of players, culture and coaching, they improved to a Top 20 defense.

The only variable here of course is the DC. I think it's to early to tell right now.
Stanford's defense would have still been bad 2 years into Harbaughs tenure with Fangio coaching them.

Very good post. Sorry for some of the duplication in mine. Your post wasn't here when I started mine.

 

[guppycane]

Its pretty simple. Have a great s&c program, and play jr's through 5th year sr's instead of being a weak team that every jr who can get drafted in the 6th round bolt to the nfl and then play frosh thru jr's.

 

[UM58]

Look at our Oline. Not only are they huge, but these are pretty highly recruited kids. Linder and Seantrel were #1 at their spots overall, Feliciano, Bunche and Flowers all had huge offers in addition to UM. No reason we should not have a running game that looks like it's going downhill.

Agree. I still can't figure out why we aren't imposing our will on opposing defenses. We have talented guys who spent quality time in the S & C program this summer. They are big, strong, and some pretty athletic. We should and need to be a ball-control, play-action, Chud-esque, offense this year. We have the players to do it. I'm convinced our offense can do it, and it just kills me to see them severely underperforming.

It's a mindset and we don't have it.