The CardBoard
Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - 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: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 (/thread-10487.html)


Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - fullmetal - 11-01-2015

Left-footed kicker kicking from the left hash mark at range was a tough order to fill.  Still...whew.  I thought the roughing-the-passer call was marginal at best given the amount of holding I thought I'd been seeing all game.  Cardiac Cardinal, what a great Halloween costume for the team.

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - BostonCard - 11-01-2015

(11-01-2015, 12:50 AM)fullmetal link Wrote:Left-footed kicker kicking from the left hash mark at range was a tough order to fill.  Still...whew.  I thought the roughing-the-passer call was marginal at best given the amount of holding I thought I'd been seeing all game.  Cardiac Cardinal, what a great Halloween costume for the team.


Or the Cougin it Cougars.  Thank Goodness we didn't Clemson this one.

BC

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - 81alum - 11-01-2015

I am interested in this remark from Shaw:

Quote: The wet, blustery conditions made it hard on the offenses.  "It was hard to run, pass and pass protect," Shaw said.
http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/ukropina-fg-lifts-stanford-washington-state-30-28-34887256

I understand why passes were less accurate in the rain.  I understand why it was hard to make cuts when running.  But what is it about the rain that makes it harder to pass protect? 

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - Brainiac_Infinite - 11-01-2015

(11-01-2015, 01:00 AM)81alum link Wrote:I am interested in this remark from Shaw:

Quote: The wet, blustery conditions made it hard on the offenses.  "It was hard to run, pass and pass protect," Shaw said.
http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/ukropina-fg-lifts-stanford-washington-state-30-28-34887256

I understand why passes were less accurate in the rain.  I understand why it was hard to make cuts when running.  But what is it about the rain that makes it harder to pass protect?

Our "great" O-Line completely disappeared tonight.  WSU D-line out-physicaled and demolished our O-Line.

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - fullmetal - 11-01-2015

I wonder if it was the turf.  WSU plays on artificial turf, right?  Is it harder to get purchase on those rubber pellets?

Viz. that would-be WSU tackler that Hogan juked on the right sideline...the Cougar player just skidded right past Hogan as if on ice.

I wonder if WSU sets the QB back deeper on shotgun sets.  The DL sometimes appeared to be driving their respective WSU blockers backward, but never really got to Falk in time.  A hypothetical lack of purchase on turf could lead to that kind of compensation...

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - JohnR34231 - 11-01-2015

Yeah, I thought on a day when the opposing defense found a way to stop CMac and we were having an off day passing we were vulnerable. Fortunately, Shaw came up with an antidote, Hogan's running. Still, it took a smile from the football gods to allow us to stay unbeaten in conference play.

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - Hurlburt88 - 11-01-2015

Great that Hogan's ankle was strong enough that he could run with confidence. 

Maybe this has been commented on elsewhere and I missed it, but even in the 2nd quarter the "4" on the back of Falk's jersey looked like swiss cheese--I assume from repeated hits. 

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - TriangleTree - 11-01-2015

(11-01-2015, 12:13 AM)garvin link Wrote:By any statistical measure, Washington State ought to have won. They outgained us 442 to 312, had 27 first downs to our 17, and at one point had scored on six consecutive possessions.

True , but they really struggled at converting their deep drives into touchdowns, where Stanford managed to the few times we did. Sounds obvious enough, but the shrinking field seems to favor a run team over one that lives and dies by the pass. Looking at the drive charts, they ate much of the field without much interference at all, but then seemed to hit a brick wall within the red zone. The epitome of bend and not break for us.



Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - Velodoc - 11-01-2015

From what I saw, it was just a bad combination of factors that could have, as many pundits predicted, resulted in a big upset. Their coaches prepared well, resulting in a D that keyed on and stymied McCaffrey.  Our individual O-lineman didn't so much play poorly, but got outmanned.
Combined with the conditions--that limited McCaffrey's jukes and Hogan's accuracy--we had no run game and could not exploit their D with Hogan's typically accurate over-the-middle intermediate throws to TE's or outs to WR's.  Nice halftime adjustment by our coaching staff and great execution by Hogan got needed points. 

All great teams have to win close games in adverse conditions, on the road in a hostile environment and when stars have off-nights--we overcame all three last night.

I question (again) Shaw's conservative play calling in red zone on final drive.  I understand his philosophy, but (like Utah in 2013) he can be dangerously stubborn.  7 points would have been brobdingnagian and saved a lot of people a lot of anxiety.  May a bit of razzle-dazzle on that third down?

But, overall, great win over a well-coached, talented (and under-rated) team. 

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - Velodoc - 11-01-2015

Whoops...autofill error...."large proportions?"...where'd that come from...more like "exceedingly helpful."

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - FarmBoy - 11-01-2015

The word "h,uge" is banned on this board.

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - Leftcoast - 11-01-2015

Nice contribution Velodoc.  I agree on the play calling and knew immediately that we were in for a tense two minutes when we settled for three.

Don't worry about the brobdingnagian thing - it's a long story that dates back to 1999 tough, tough loss in 1999.

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - CompSci87 - 11-01-2015

(11-01-2015, 07:05 AM)hurlburt88 link Wrote:Great that Hogan's ankle was strong enough that he could run with confidence. 

Maybe this has been commented on elsewhere and I missed it, but even in the 2nd quarter the "4" on the back of Falk's jersey looked like swiss cheese--I assume from repeated hits.

There were rubber pellets from the artificial turf stuck to it. Might have been from just one hit when he landed on his back.

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - Extra Point - 11-01-2015

(11-01-2015, 09:38 AM)Velodoc link Wrote:I question (again) Shaw's conservative play calling in red zone on final drive.  I understand his philosophy, but (like Utah in 2013) he can be dangerously stubborn. 

Do you really think that Shaw intentionally makes bad play calling decisions just to piss off the fans who have a much better understanding of the game?

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - fullmetal - 11-02-2015

Veteran experience from Ronnie Harris and great execution from Meeks.  Love this team.

Hogan's running wasn't technically an antidote that Shaw came up with.  It was the offensive option that WSU gambled on Stanford not employing, and indeed, for most of this season, Hogan hasn't had to run.  His handoffs never looked like he would be pulling back for a run or a throw, and perhaps Shaw was saving that one for a bigger game.  But hey, better late than never.

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - BostonCard - 11-02-2015

Hogan has 42 rushes for 86 yards on the year, but if you exclude 14 sacks for -78 yards, he has run 28 times for 164 yards.

Before this week, he'd had two decent rushing games:
USC, where he ran 4 times for 45 yards if you exclude the three sacks he suffered
Washington, where he ran 6 times for 49 yards, if you exclude the two sacks he suffered

In between those two games he had a gimpy ankle and really didn't run much.

None of those were as big as Saturday, but they (plus a couple of years of film) show that Hogan is capable of it.

BC

P.S.  That game against WSU cost Hogan 20 points off his passer rating in conference, yet he still leads the conference by over 20 points.  He is second to Kessler if you look at all games.  Goff is third and Falk is fourth.

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - Mick - 11-02-2015

(11-01-2015, 01:26 AM)Brainiac_Infinite link Wrote:[quote author=81alum link=topic=13443.msg138646#msg138646 date=1446364836]
I am interested in this remark from Shaw:

Quote: The wet, blustery conditions made it hard on the offenses.  "It was hard to run, pass and pass protect," Shaw said.
http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/ukropina-fg-lifts-stanford-washington-state-30-28-34887256

I understand why passes were less accurate in the rain.  I understand why it was hard to make cuts when running.  But what is it about the rain that makes it harder to pass protect?

Our "great" O-Line completely disappeared tonight.  WSU D-line out-physicaled and demolished our O-Line.
[/quote]

I actually thought they were much quicker than our big guys, rather than out-physicaled/demolished our OL.

Re: Final: Stanford 30, WSU 28 - oldalum - 11-02-2015

yes, I thought Hogan needed a quicker outlet/bailout from the rush. Once in the first half Love was running toward the sideline as an outlet but he didn't look back quick enough; Hogan couldn't pass it to him and got sacked. Rather than keep the running back in to pass-protect, I'd have liked to see us have him make one block and then take off. I think Hogan could have dumped it off multiple times and let the RBs make what they can in the open field.