From: marc@yogi.austin.ibm.com (Marc J. Stephenson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Stanford vs. A&M (was Re: ATM Graduation Rates)
Date: 26 Aug 92 15:04:26 GMT
Organization: IBM, Austin

In article <17ee3eINN11a@agate.berkeley.edu> rhan@viterbi.berkeley.edu (Richard Han) writes:
> [ educational system discussion deleted ] 
>
>Back to football.  I'm surprised that the line on the A&M vs. Stanford game
>is only 2-3 points in A&M's favor.  I'd favor A&M by two touchdowns or more.
>
>On the matchups:
>1) A&M offense has depth and speed in its favor, except at the QB position.
>Stanford's defense is sorely lacking in depth and speed and will try to
>make up for it by "smart" play, but may be worn down by A&M's sustained 
>running attack.  I don't see A&M passing due to their brand-new QB.  This
>could be a major handicap if A&M gets behind late.

A&M's quarterback isn't that new anymore.  Jeff Granger played in 7 games
last season, accumulating a decent amount of playing time in more than just
mop up situations (Richardson was injured at the beginning of the season).
Granger is a red-shirt sophomore.  Now if Granger hadn't have been cut from
the Olympic baseball team in time to rejoin the football tema, then that would
be a different story.  By the way, the two redshirt freshmen who had battled
it out for QB in Granger's absence are now presumably fighting for the  
backup slot.  The former 3rd stringer, senior Kent Petty, has been moved to
tight end.  The former 4th stringer, who had come into A&M at the same time
and at about the same acclaim as Granger, Steve Emerson, has been moved to
linebacker!

>
>2) Stanford's offense is multi-faceted PAC-10 and vintage 49er thanks to 
>Walsh. The A&M defense probably will not see anything like its complexity
>in its Southwest Conference schedule.  Alot of short high-percentage pass 
>patterns to backs, tight ends, and wide-outs.  But the problem with
>complex offenses is that it takes time to get everything going smoothly.
>Walsh has already scripted the first 25 plays, as he usually does.  A
>slow start will doom Stanford, while a good first quarter will boost
>Stanford's confidence and mean a long day for the Aggie defense.

This is at least the 2nd reference to the Aggie defense not being able to
handle a multiple offense.  A&M has had very little difficulty
with even the best vintage run and shoot U .of Houston offense.  Of
course, there's no tight end in that setup, but there are lots and lots of
short passes to wideouts and backs.  The SWC, for all of its warts, has
not been an option-dominated conference in quite some time.  Houston and
SMU run the run-and-shoot, Rice, Texas, TCU, and A&M run multiple offenses,
and Texas Tech and Baylor run I-formations (with Baylor also running the Veer
on occasion, but their QB was among the leaders in passing (109-206, 1853 yds)).
It's not like the Ags have been up against the Wishbone and the Straight-T
for the last 10 years.
-- 
Marc Stephenson		    IBM AWD (Advanced Workstations Division - Austin,TX)
DISCLAIMER: The content of this posting is independent of official IBM position.
INTERNET->marc@perfmap.austin.ibm.com    VNET: MARC at AUSVMQ  IBM T/L: 678-3189
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college