The CardBoard
Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . (/thread-26280.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - Mick - 09-05-2026

OT's have the highest average Wonderlic scores, and OG's and Centers are in the top four. Here's the listed Wonderlic score average per position group:

Offensive tackle – 26
Center – 25
Quarterback – 24
Guard – 23
Tight end – 22
Safety – 19
Linebacker – 19
Cornerback – 18
Wide receiver – 17
Fullback – 17
Halfback – 16

If this is true, why can't we have All American offensive linemen all the time?

Wonderlic test - Wikipedia

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - BostonCard - 09-05-2026

I think Jim Mora captured the spirit of the game:

"What happened was,… we got our ass kicked. …, we just got our ass totally kicked. We couldn't do diddly poo offensively, we couldn't make a first down, we couldn't run the ball, we didn't try to run the ball, we couldn't complete a pass—we sucked." [1] (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/7302157/jim-mora-reflects-playoffs-moment)

(Only difference is he was referring to the second half, and we sucked the entire game)

BC

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - Giants - 09-05-2026

(Today, 08:54 AM)Mick Wrote:  OT's have the highest average Wonderlic scores, and OG's and Centers are in the top four. Here's the listed Wonderlic score average per position group:

Offensive tackle – 26
Center – 25
Quarterback – 24
Guard – 23
Tight end – 22
Safety – 19
Linebacker – 19
Cornerback – 18
Wide receiver – 17
Fullback – 17
Halfback – 16

If this is true, why can't we have All American offensive linemen all the time?

Wonderlic test - Wikipedia

Because the OLers are smart enough to know that big checks lead to fat investment portfolios?  

In this era of college football, you only need to understand three words to be able to separate the top programs from the rest of the crowd - Follow the money!

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - BigJohn043 - 09-05-2026

(11 hours ago)BostonCard Wrote:  I think Jim Mora captured the spirit of the game:

"What happened was,… we got our ass kicked. …, we just got our ass totally kicked. We couldn't do diddly poo offensively, we couldn't make a first down, we couldn't run the ball, we didn't try to run the ball, we couldn't complete a pass—we sucked." [1] (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/7302157/jim-mora-reflects-playoffs-moment)

(Only difference is he was referring to the second half, and we sucked the entire game)

BC

I guess I have a different view.

Yes we got our ass kicked.  Is it a shock to anyone that we aren't competitive with top 5 teams?

But.....
We have a good QB
Receivers were actually open
We did OK in pass blocking
If our OL could block we have some RBs
We held Miami to 121 yards rushing and 3.8 yards per rush

This is the most optimistic I have been about Stanford football in a long time.

We played hard even as we were getting our ass kicked.

Schemes on offense looked really good.  Open receivers against Miami?  I would love to run more but it is hard if you can't block.

Of course we should have doubled Toni on defense.  I wonder if the staff was trying to make a point.

I feel good.  Not sure if we will win 6, but I feel like we have a much better shot than I did before the first two games.

Could this Luck / Pritchard thing actually work?

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - JohnR34231 - 09-05-2026

(11 hours ago)BigJohn043 Wrote:  
(11 hours ago)BostonCard Wrote:  I think Jim Mora captured the spirit of the game:

"What happened was,… we got our ass kicked. …, we just got our ass totally kicked. We couldn't do diddly poo offensively, we couldn't make a first down, we couldn't run the ball, we didn't try to run the ball, we couldn't complete a pass—we sucked." [1] (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/7302157/jim-mora-reflects-playoffs-moment)

(Only difference is he was referring to the second half, and we sucked the entire game)

BC

I guess I have a different view.

Yes we got our ass kicked.  Is it a shock to anyone that we aren't competitive with top 5 teams?

But.....
We have a good QB
Receivers were actually open
We did OK in pass blocking
If our OL could block we have some RBs
We held Miami to 121 yards rushing and 3.8 yards per rush

This is the most optimistic I have been about Stanford football in a long time.

We played hard even as we were getting our ass kicked.

Schemes on offense looked really good.  Open receivers against Miami?  I would love to run more but it is hard if you can't block.

Of course we should have doubled Toni on defense.  I wonder if the staff was trying to make a point.

I feel good.  Not sure if we will win 6, but I feel like we have a much better shot than I did before the first two games.

Could this Luck / Pritchard thing actually work?

I don't expect us to be competitive with teams like Miami, but I would hope we could score a touchdown or two if we are going to give them six.

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - BostonCard - 09-05-2026

Let’s break it down:
We couldn't do diddly poo offensively: 6 points, <300 yards, 4.6 ypp (diddly poo is a reasonably apt description)
We couldn’t make a first down: 17 for the whole game, crucially 5/15 on third down and 0/2 on fourth down; we certainly couldn’t make a first down when it counted
We couldn’t run the ball: 78 yards rushing, 3.4 yards per cary
We didn’t try to run the ball: 23 rushing attempts (35% of offensive plays)
We couldn’t complete a pass: 22/42 (52% completion percentage)
We sucked: we lost 45-6, so… yeah

Yup, I think Mora summed it up pretty accurately, TBH

BC

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - JohnR34231 - 09-05-2026

(Today, 08:54 AM)Mick Wrote:  OT's have the highest average Wonderlic scores, and OG's and Centers are in the top four. Here's the listed Wonderlic score average per position group:

Offensive tackle – 26
Center – 25
Quarterback – 24
Guard – 23
Tight end – 22
Safety – 19
Linebacker – 19
Cornerback – 18
Wide receiver – 17
Fullback – 17
Halfback – 16

If this is true, why can't we have All American offensive linemen all the time?

Wonderlic test - Wikipedia

Surprised fullbacks are ranked so low. Damn. Maybe too many shots to the head.

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - msqueri - 09-05-2026

1. A setback and failed test early in the Pritchard era. It stinks to get thoroughly dominated at home and on national television. We are clearly still a bad team. Everything folks have said about the yawning chasm between Stanford and teams that compete for relevance on the national stage is true. That's the bottom line. If Luck and Pritchard want us to compete, the seriousness that has been mustered to date will not get us there. The most important thing, as our brain trust acknowledges, is the quality of the players. Ours aren't good enough. Nonetheless, in the next three months until we get a chance to upgrade the roster, we have opportunities to show progress and hopefully make future sledding easier. Even in this game, when Miami hit the throttle to start the season as they routinely have in the Cristobal era, there were signs of building blocks that, with continued work could produce our best team of the New World Order. The margin in this game was catastrophically ugly - equivalent to the quality of team that would beat the national champion by multiple scores. Not going to sugarcoat that. Have to flush it. But the team's goals can still be ahead of them.

2. This was the worst we've been dominated, whether you look at points per non-garbage drive, yards per play, or score, in the 19 games since 2024 SMU. We gave up 6 points per non-garbage drive, literally a touchdown every single time other than the first quarter three and out. That ranks in ignominy in this era with 2023 Oregon State, 2024 NC State, and 2025 Notre Dame as opponents that did whatever they wanted against us. We scored only 0.857 points per non-garbage drive. That's bad but we've had this much trouble scoring on offense a dozen times since 2021. Yards per play confirms yesterday's defense to be dusted 'n' disgusted and the offense less horrific. We gave up 8.19 yards per play, the eighth worst we've been dominated by an offense this era. The Mensah to Toney duo is great but we shouldn't have made them look that great. On offense, gaining 4.6 yards per play is actually nearly two yards more per play than last year's Miami game and better than seven games last season. Considering that Miami was preseason SP+ Defensive #7, this is a silver lining. Our offense looks better through two games than last year, and that's without Pale, Prongos, or Nico Brown. Because the defense got torched so badly, the net points per drive was the eighth worst showing of the era and net yards per play margin was ninth worst. I don't want to put too much lipstick on this pig but it is important to acknowledge Miami's quality. We have only played six teams this era that finished top eight in the AP poll, which I think Miami has a good chance to do.

3. We are only two games in to the Pritchard era. All takes on coaching acumen should be provisional. Subjectively, I like what I've seen out of QB play and playcalling and don't really otherwise have opinions on the effect of coaching. There were some things in this game that raise some concerns. Offensive delays of game and WR false starts two weeks in a row are not great. The nation-leading drops may or may not reflect on coaching. Giving up a Miami record-breaking passing touchdown debut and receiving yardage reflects poorly on a former NFL defensive coordinator famed for pass defense and leading a unit expected to be solid. It is striking to me that our strategy was to focus on the run (both evidently and per the Darrius Davis interview this week) and we succeeded in that and still got boat-raced all game long until Miami called off the dogs. Perhaps not game-planning, first and foremost, around maybe the highest paid college football player ever throwing to maybe the best receiver in the country was dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, and not in the hyphy way. And if we were dialing up safety help for all the man coverage on Toney, that wasn't clear on a number of plays. Heck, several times it was just a safety (or LB!) in coverage on him.

4. The other provisional coaching observation is that I see some dissonance between our emphasis on finishing and being ruthless and relentless and Pritchard's calm, not hard-edged demeanor. Does keeping QB1 and RB1 in deep into garbage time send a message of intensity after we've already kicked a 24 yard field goal down 25 when the next position after the half is going back to the juggernaut offense? When the coach isn't yelling at anybody? When he uses the post-game statement to talk about what we're excited about coming out of a 39 point home loss? I have said a lot about how Pritchard's personality contributes to a good culture. But it's fair to ask these questions about his edge, at least until we show some edginess. Even if all we wanted from him was love, hope, and motivation, there needs to be some edge to sustain us through adversity.

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - msqueri - 09-05-2026

5. The worst part about this game was, of course, the pass defense. It takes the cake from last year's Virginia game and 2022 USC as the least resistance we've put up to a passing attack in modern times. It's a little bit less of an outlier for Miami as they utterly dominate in the air about once a year. Also bad was our own passing efficiency (avoiding sacks and other aspects of QB play redeemed Warren's game), with only three worse passing efficiency performances last year (though one of them was Miami). Miami had four more dominant pass defense games last year, so part of this is the enemy gets a vote. The run game on both sides of the ball was far better, I would say straight-up good. On our side of the ball, 78 rushing yards may not sound like a lot, but we had 8-9 worse rushing games last year, including the Miami game, and Miami held 11 opponents to fewer yards per carry last year. Some of this statistical respectablity was one big chunk run by Irvin early and some success in garbage time. In any case, this was an encouraging subplot for a beleaguered offensive line against a mobbin' defense. Our run defense also looked good, middling compared to our run defense games last year (and most teams weren't Miami and Fletcher), three quarters of a yard per carry better than we did against Miami last year, and better than ten teams did against Miami last year. In short, our game plan to be competitive in the run game worked, it just didn't work big picture because of the obvious (the back-breaking Mensah-Toney connection) and because we kept letting Miami extend drives. Getting dominated on third downs to the tune of eight conversions on 11 tries is hard to overcome. The holding penalties in pass protection also made clear that, while we technically avoided many sacks, this was a mismatch up front.

6. The guy avoiding those sacks, by hook or by crook (one sack through two games not on any of our bingo cards) and making good ball-protecting decisions (no turnovers again), is the story of our young season so far. Warren's first two games at Stanford have each had a better Total QBR than any Stanford QB game last year and he has already surpassed Daniels' 2024 70+ Total QBR games and matched Daniels' 2023 in that regard. Evidence is mounting that we have our best QB since at least McKee. Many of us, certainly including me, lamented not getting a more touted QB in the portal. Well, Warren may teach us this year that sometimes it's cool to floss but don't buy an eighty-five thousand dollar car before you buy a house. His brand of competence may be exactly what we need out of a transitional/building year star player.

7. Reflected in Total QBR but not in more dumb stats is that an astonishing 17.3 percent of Warren's on-target passes in the first two games have been dropped. If that were to persist over the course of a full season it would be the most drops a Power Four QB has been saddled with since Colorado's JT Shrout in 2022. Among 126 qualifying receiver targets nationally so far this year, PFF's drops grade has Blackburn 96th (perhaps no chance to redeem for a while given yesterday's injury), Robinson 109th, and Hall dead last 126th. Unacceptable. Cue yesterday's best news, the return of Caden High. High dominated in his mere quarter of action. I love the way he grooves when he moves, in this game getting first downs on 86 percent of his targets and accounting for over half of our non-garbage first downs despite being only WR4 in snaps yesterday as we eased him back in. Last year CJ Williams had this many first downs in a game twice (one of which had 18 targets) and High did it once. It's a wonderful sign going forward that High is back and so evidently has excellent chemistry with Warren. Less happy yesterday was that Ford didn't get a first down until garbage time and that Blackburn looks like he will be out. Still, Warren to High appears to be the best thing we have going for us this year. [Moving the chains (first down) leaderboard: High (6), Blackburn (2), Ford (2), Irvin, Robinson, Onovughe, Marcus Brown, Holt] The patchwork OL, at least according to initial PFF grades, appeared to be subpar but serviceable with the exception of Anderson (our top performer in the opener) getting roasted just like he did against Miami last year.

8. You don't need me to tell you Malachi Toney ate yesterday. While I'm not sure Toney will ever top that game, his not so lightweight flamboastin' striking the Voldemort pose multiple times is a taste of what he'll wreak on the ACC all year. Rose, who struggled in coverage in the opener, was our only defender to cover a Toney target and not give up a first down. Bryant gave up two touchdowns yet his 14 yards per target allowed looks fine compared to chunk plays given up by Davis, McAllister, and Mattingly (the first two of whom may have hurt themselves trying to cover #1?) the only times they got the unfair assignment. When everybody fails like this I give credit to the receiver - Toney ran through our DBs and LBs like Metamucil - and put most blame on the scheme, though one of this board's wise resident former Division I DBs told me I shouldn't let the individuals off the hook either. Pritchard blamed the failures on lack of leverage (clear) and not swarming to Toney after the catch (we weren't even close so I wonder how realistic this is as a solution). Failures aside, in terms of individual play, Rose, Nicholson, Briehler, Cooper, Galvan, Tafiti, Marceau-Olayinka, Bryant, and Mattingly had multiple positive box score plays but the latter four needed garbage time and PFF nuked Galvan. Rose led the way by far with eight such plays. Nicholson continues to quietly be good, though it's fair in retrospect to ask why he was the only guy not asked to help with #1. I'm encouraged by signs so far that Briehler and Bachhuber are on schedule.

9. This game could have been uglier were it not for a good special teams game. Flintoft had net punts of 49 to the 23 (excellent), 45 to the 33 (very good), 48 to the 11 (excellent), 44 to the 35 (very good), 39 to the 13 after the illegal touching (good), 40 to the 40 (mediocre), 40 to the 37 (mediocre). Toney getting return opportunities? Nope. Fair catches? Yup. Kenney made his only field goal attempts, chip shots of 30 and 24 yards. The special teams low point was Davis' kick returns giving up five yards and nine yards compared to fair catches and only getting a 20 yard return to the 31 after an unnecessary roughness penalty. Mattingly, Jernegan, Johnson, and Edwards had coverage tackles. Positive phase of the game for us relative to the other phases.

10. 40 Water game balls: Caden High, Matt Rose, Aidan Flintoft, Brian Lindgren

11. The bye is unusually well placed for an early season week off as we need to get healthier and this is the perfect time. The most crucial stretch of our season happens to come right after the bye, with three winnable but challenging games. This season still feels like an important window of opportunity to show we're moving forward, have hope, and can take advantage of the retention Luck and Fisher negotiated. Constantly reading about other teams' executive deals online, we've got a limited amount of time. Everybody is chasing these dollar signs, we've got to stay on our grind. We just want help, don't need the whole plate. But anything positive out of this season likely requires coming out of the bye ready to get a win or two out of the Duke-Georgia Tech-Wake Forest stretch. We've seen the team play an opponent we outmatch and an opponent that outmatches us, now let's see some true tests.

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - Goose - 09-05-2026

(10 hours ago)BostonCard Wrote:  Let’s break it down:
We couldn't do diddly poo offensively: 6 points, <300 yards, 4.6 ypp (diddly poo is a reasonably apt description)
We couldn’t make a first down: 17 for the whole game, crucially 5/15 on third down and 0/2 on fourth down; we certainly couldn’t make a first down when it counted
We couldn’t run the ball: 78 yards rushing, 3.4 yards per cary
We didn’t try to run the ball: 23 rushing attempts (35% of offensive plays)
We couldn’t complete a pass: 22/42 (52% completion percentage)
We sucked: we lost 45-6, so… yeah

Yup, I think Mora summed it up pretty accurately, TBH

BC
While I agree with all of the above, I think we sucked even more on defense. Miami punted twice. Only one of those was in non-garbage time. If the Stanford offense had performed at its very best, i.e. the receivers had caught the passes that they should have, Stanford would probably have scored 14 more points (maybe 21 in the absolute best case if we get that PI). Getting beat 45 to 20 is still brutal. It could easily have been worse because Miami definitely took their foot off the gas. They may not have if we were closer.
 
My disappointment isn't the loss, even a pretty large loss. One thing I really liked about the Hawaii game was that for a great majority of the game Stanford's offense executed like a well coached competent team and didn't beat themselves. Last night, that wasn't nearly as true. I didn't expect we could run the ball much. However our receivers had problems catching passes that were eminently catchable. We aren't good enough to even look decent on offense when that happens. We were going to get beat in any case. Miami is offensively so much better than our defense that winning was off the table. Our defense probably played somewhat close to as well as they could. IMO that was not true of the offense, which is disappointing.

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - ADPinWDC - 09-05-2026

FWIW, Mensah now tops the Voldemort betting odds at +550 in a competitive year of QBs.
Up from +1500 last week.
Knowledgeable analysts saw a QBR 260 performance in the opening rout with 5 TDs. 

We knew to cover Toney and didn't. 
He made half their yards, plus 3 TDs.
Agree with msqueri that half the problem is our Defense is cannot put pressure on the QB.
Any cover defense cannot last 5+ seconds.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/25496362-darian-mensah-malachi-toneys-updated-Voldemort-trophy-betting-odds-after-making-history-miami-win

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - Goose - 09-05-2026

(6 hours ago)ADPinWDC Wrote:  FWIW, Mensah now tops the Voldemort betting odds at +550 in a competitive year of QBs.
Up from +1500 last week. 
Knowledgeable analysts saw a QBR 260 performance in the opening rout with 5 TDs. 

We knew to cover Toney and didn't. 
He made half their yards, plus 3 TDs.
Agree with msqueri that half the problem is our Defense is cannot put pressure on the QB. 
Any cover defense cannot last 5+ seconds. 
Indeed. The defense could have good coverage on Toney for a while (sometimes too short of "a while"), but as the play continues he was inevitably going to break open. He also knew how to read what Stanford was doing and run away from that. No pressure made a lot of that possible. IMO that was more than a 50% contribution.

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - KartyFan - 09-05-2026

Seems like remarkable consistency of views across CardBoarders early in the Pritchard era. I'm sure that will change in this important next stretch against three opponents we could beat but won't be favored against.

A few comments from my seat in the stadium (have not watched any replays, so my impressions could be off):

1. Biggest upside surprise was the crowd! Announced crowd of 37,000 was 1.5x last week's, and in true attendance I believe the difference was higher. For the first time in a while, outside of the Big Game, I was not embarrassed by our attendance. This is not the goal, but encouraging to see.

Miami fans turned out in more numbers than Hawaii, but that was a small part of the difference. E-40 attracted some fans for sure, hard to know how many. And who cares anyway? Credit to Stanford if that got more butts in seats.

2. Someone asked about the E-40 performance. It was in the south end zone and we were a long way from that. A small minority was very into it and singing along. Most were casually dancing, and another strong contingent was bewildered. 

3. Offense: Overall results obviously quite poor with just two field goals. Continue to be impressed by how our receivers are able to get open, and depressed by the drops. So great to have Caden High back who seems to be the only one who can both get open and catch. He was pumped to be there!

4. I was REALLY impressed with Warren and thought he better this game than against Hawaii. 

5. It is so important to show current and future Stanford QBs that you can come here and show what you have. Nobody good will come here if he is going to be under pressure every snap. Against one of the best teams in the country, Warren was able to do that to a degree. I think he will be able to showcase his skills this year. Couldn't see any of the holding penalties from the stands, but I assume a few were in lieu of sacks. 

6. Glad to see msqueri's relative optimism on our run game - seems it wasn't as bad as I thought. Run blocking still seems like our offensive weakness, along with dropped passes.

7. Really like our offensive scheme. We are putting our players in position to make plays. Now our players just need to be better. Coaching obviously contributes to that as well, but we can't attribute player performance to talent vs. coaching at this point (maybe ever).

8. Defensive overall result could not have been much worse, as msqueri highlighted. Not good. BUT, it is really great to see we were able to contain the run. I would rather stop the run and get torched on the pass than vice versa. If you can't stop the run, you have no hope. If you can stop the run, a missed pass or two can get you a stop. That obviously didn't happen today with their QB going 27-30, but forcing teams to go to the air may serve us very well going forward. With NC State, Duke, and Georgia Tech putting up anemic offensive numbers in Week 1, we may have some chances to shut offenses down and get a win with our offense scoring in the 20s.

Now the crucial three-game streak begins. We need to get at least one win out of this, or we will (very likely) be 1-5 after the ND game. One win puts us in decent position to beat Vegas' 3.5 over/under wins and at least avoid sliding back in the win column in 2026. if we can steal two out of three, an Elon win would put us at 4-3 and dreaming of a bowl game. I think this is unlikely with two of the three games on the road, but pulling it off would breathe some real life into this program comeback.

RE: Stanford Miami Game Thread. . . . - needle - 09-05-2026

Did not see Blackburn go down, thanks for pointing that out, msqueri.

Healthy, he seems headed for the top of the stats in terms of NCAA TE receptions, so I am especially hoping he can come back soon and showcase his ability.

Truly, injuries seem to be a curse so far this year. Glad for the bye week, and, while Duke’s defense looked stout against Tulane, have to hope that the extra time to prepare is a real advantage for Stanford. I still believe Stanford will be competitive against Duke, but if Blackburn is out along with the others it seems unlikely that Stanford can win that one based on what I’ve seen from both teams.