The CardBoard
Stanford - USC 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 - USC Thread (/thread-6093.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - washingtonismoney - 11-16-2013

(11-16-2013, 09:34 PM)dabigv link Wrote:Am I going to blame a backup kicker? An OL unit that led us to 6.0 rush average (how can you say they were overmatched? absurd)?

I'm sorry, I really like Hogan, but he played a stuff game tonight, and he has on the road this entire season. Is it his fault or the coaches that he made two throws that a 2nd year starter should not be throwing?

1) well of course you can! you've got to be situational. The success of Stanford's rushing game was primarily in mixing it up with throws and other methods -- running on, say, 3rd and 8, for example. But if you wanted to do your base runs on 1st and 10, 2nd and 10, etc., then you'd get stuffed. 1st down running back rushes averaged 3.09 yards per carry, which is not good -- we can agree.

2) Hogan played a poor game and I think the staff should think about replacing him. He is highly erratic, which makes it hard to rely on him. In this case Stanford had some success with mixing it up -- throwing in unconventional situations -- but was unable to trust that too much because of Hogan's foibles. Still, there were a lot of errors to go around and I think it's most honest to account for them.



Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - Bruce Wang - 11-16-2013

I hope the team takes its anger out on Kal in a brutal way.

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - stupac2 - 11-16-2013

Why is Hogan so much better at home this season? It wasn't the case last season.

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - needle - 11-16-2013

As a fan, I know from watching college football that a team is always vulnerable the week following a big game victory. Plus, winning on the road is hard. I knew a loss was a possibility, and I'm not devastated. USC is talented, they played very well, Hodari made a kick, blah blah blah

But for the players on the team, this must be a killer, killer loss--undoubtedly the most soulcrushing defeat of the Shaw era. I could see it on Skov's face as he was walking off the field. The goal for the season--a very, very realistic goal--won't be reached (nobody should believe in a Beaver upset).

I feel bad as a fan, but I feel much, much worse for the players tonight.

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - jacketree - 11-16-2013

God forbid anyone give the team formerly Under Stanford Control any credit. Pretty clutch really. It was definitely there for the taking, but the close one's have a way of balancing out. Pac12 really is tough. Maybe SC will screw up and hire Ogeron....

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - AthleticsDynasty - 11-16-2013

Hogan didn't play good but if we are handing out blame I think Ty needs to take the biggest piece of the pie

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - CowboyIndian - 11-16-2013

(11-16-2013, 09:50 PM)jacketree link Wrote:God forbid anyone give the team formerly Under Stanford Control any credit.

Does this count? "Kessler played really well"

The story is, they played well enough to win...and we didn't.

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - OutsiderFan - 11-16-2013

This loss doesn't bother me so much because pretty much everyone who follows Stanford closely knew it was more than likely that the offense's chronic inconsistency in the 4th quarter of games especially would cost the team some time this season. 

And frankly, after a slow start, Stanford's defense absolutely dominated the USC offense the whole second half.  It took the following star alignment for Stanford to lose (more than USC won):

1. A blocked FG by a backup kicker
2. An interception after plowing through USC on the ground to the 5 yd line
3. A ridiculous anomaly of a play when Montgomery didn't just let a ball Hogan was throwing away go out of bounds, and instead tipped it up so it could be picked off
4. Alex Carter going out of the game so he couldn't matchup on Lee on the 4th and 2 (instead of Amanam)

Stanford wasn't the better team, but Stanford kicked the crud out of USC in the trenches, as Stanford out rushed them by what, almost 10-1?  And they came within any one of those four things above not happening of shutting them out in the second half, and almost for three quarters.  So yes it sucks to lose, but this is the most satisfaction I think I've ever had from a loss.  Stanford proved its toughness and that it has the athletes to compete with USC and Oregon toe-to-toe. It just needs a little bit better passing game to go with that defense and run game.

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - needle - 11-16-2013

(11-16-2013, 10:12 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:This loss doesn't bother me so much because pretty much everyone who follows Stanford closely knew it was more than likely that the offense's chronic inconsistency in the 4th quarter of games especially would cost the team some time this season. 

And frankly, after a slow start, Stanford's defense absolutely dominated the University of Spoiled Children  offense the whole second half.  It took the following star alignment for Stanford to lose (more than University of Spoiled Children  won):

1. A blocked FG by a backup kicker
2. An interception after plowing through University of Spoiled Children  on the ground to the 5 yd line
3. A ridiculous anomaly of a play when Montgomery didn't just let a ball Hogan was throwing away go out of bounds, and instead tipped it up so it could be picked off
4. Alex Carter going out of the game so he couldn't matchup on Lee on the 4th and 2 (instead of Amanam)

Stanford wasn't the better team, but Stanford kicked the crud out of University of Spoiled Children  in the trenches, as Stanford out rushed them by what, almost 10-1?  And they came within any one of those four things above not happening of shutting them out in the second half, and almost for three quarters.  So yes it sucks to lose, but this is the most satisfaction I think I've ever had from a loss.  Stanford proved its toughness and that it has the athletes to compete with University of Spoiled Children  and Oregon toe-to-toe. It just needs a little bit better passing game to go with that defense and run game.

The problem with this line of thinking is that Skov and Murphy are once-in-a-generation players. I kind of think Mason is a really, really special defensive coach, too, but I have a slim hope he'll stick around a bit more.

I feel sick thinking about how well the defense played only to be let down by the offense.

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - PrinceLightfoot - 11-16-2013

What was most uncharacteristic of our team tonight were the penalties and Ty Montgomery dropping the ball.

The turnover in the red zone or field goal range has actually been pretty common for our QBs:

vs SJSU - 1st drive of the 4th quarter. Fumbled on the 28 yrd line.
vs Army - 1st drive of the 4th quarter. Pass from the 24 yrd line intercepted in the end zone.
vs Washington State - 2nd drive of 2nd quarter. Pass from the 15 yrd line intercepted in the end zone.
vs UCLA - 3rd drive of 2nd quarter. Pass from the 23 yrd line intercepted at the 6 yrd line.
vs Oregon St - 2nd drive of 1st quarter. Fumbled on the 17 yrd line.
vs USC - 1st drive of 4th quarter. Pass from the 10 yrd line intercepted at the 8 yrd line.


I feel sick...

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - OutsiderFan - 11-16-2013

Skov and Murphy are great, but Stanford has recruited quite well.  Kevin Palma looks like a monster in the making.  Peter Kalambayi is going to be outstanding.  Sean Barton, Joey Alfieri, Bobby Okereke, Jordan Perez, look quite impressive.  And I'm quite intrigued with Mike Tyler.  AJ Tarpley has another year, and so too do Lueders and Vaughters.  Kevin Anderson is really coming along too.

But yes, it's tough for the offense to look at the defense after that game, but the defense can see the offense really did some great things in the game, even though they weren't able to finish.

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - Spiny_Norman - 11-16-2013

I was at the game and felt like Indiana and Henry Jones in pre-WWII Berlin ("my son, we are pilgrims in an unholy land").  Why was Carter not in the game in the 4th quarter?  Injury?

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - washingtonismoney - 11-16-2013

(11-16-2013, 10:43 PM)Spiny_Norman link Wrote:I was at the game and felt like Indiana and Henry Jones ("my son, we are pilgrims in an unholy land").  Why was Carter not in the game in the 4th quarter?  Injury?

Think so. He looked a bit shaken up after that brobdingnagian tackle to deny that SC wideout the first down. Ronnie Harris was capable as a CB, I thought.

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - washingtonismoney - 11-16-2013

Stanford's losses have been really weird statistically. In both losses Stanford had sound wins in yards per play -- over a yard more per play, actually. Sports are strange sometimes.

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - fullmetal - 11-17-2013

turnovers negate yards.  simple as that.  the game was thrown away.

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - ChicagoCard - 11-17-2013

(11-16-2013, 10:12 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:This loss doesn't bother me so much because pretty much everyone who follows Stanford closely knew it was more than likely that the offense's chronic inconsistency in the 4th quarter of games especially would cost the team some time this season.

I agree. Outside of the specific failures, early drops and late interceptions, this is the overriding flaw. Two late consecutive three-and-outs against Washington, more three-and-outs and a late turnover against Oregon St, and not coming up with points deep in opponent territory (plus the last pick) in this game. These three were Hogan's worst games.

Who's the QB next year? 4-way competition among Hogan, Burns, Crower and Lloyd from spring camp forward? Or no real competition at all?

Re: Stanford - University of Spoiled Children Thread - washingtonismoney - 11-17-2013

It's not going to be Crower or Lloyd. Burns is the possibility.

EDIT: IIRC Drukarev predicted on twitter back on signing day that Burns would have a shot in 2014.