The CardBoard
Final: Stanford 35, UCLA 17 - 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 35, UCLA 17 (/thread-4356.html)


Re: Final: Stanford 35, UCLA 17 - Farm93 - 11-24-2012

Draw!!! Really?

I was in the stands and when the score was 21-7 the thing was basically over.  It seemed clear that UCLA would not get to 21 without help from the Stanford O.  UCLA people were already leaving for the night when it was 28-10.  And the rush to the exits was clearly evident when it was 35-10.  Beating the traffic is a sport everyone in SoCal must play, so for many casual fans the call of the golf course was probably too great to ignore.

If 35-17 is a draw, then I hope Stanford can repeat that effort on Friday.  UCLA is 1-3 vs the Pac-12 North and 8-0 vs everyone else.  And UCLA skipped Oregon this year.

I suspect the spread will be a bit more than 2 points on Friday.

Re: Final: Stanford 35, UCLA 17 - cardcoug - 11-24-2012

(11-24-2012, 10:33 PM)Farm93 link Wrote:UCLA is 1-3 vs the Pac-12 North and 8-0 vs everyone else.  And UCLA skipped Oregon this year.

Wow, that really puts the balance of power in perspective.

Re: Final: Stanford 35, UCLA 17 - needle - 11-24-2012

Did you see Franklin's TD run? He broke about three tackles just carrying guys.

I think he's the best RB Stanford has faced all year.

By not giving Franklin very many touches at all in the second half, Mora clearly was playing for Nov. 30.

As far as the Hundley sacks, I expect to see about a million screens to Franklin and Fauria in the championship game. And Hundley is going to get some more designed runs.

Worry about this: Stanford had four fumbles (only lost one). Somehow this has become a real problem. And Hogan could have been picked a couple of times, I thought.

I think both teams were pretty emotionally drained and neither played their best, but credit again to Shaw for getting the team ready.

I thought the O-line did great to give Hogan time to hit Ertz on the crossing routes. UCLA will make an adjustment to try to take that route away, for sure.

Losing Terrell is big. I'm hopeful we have somebody who can field punts without making a mistake, much less so that another WR can step in and provide some of the big catches Terrell provided in the last few weeks. Maybe his injury isn't as severe as I fear.

Props to Wilkerson, who had his best game of the season, fumble notwithstanding.



Re: Final: Stanford 35, UCLA 17 - socalstanfan1 - 11-25-2012

(11-24-2012, 10:46 PM)needle link Wrote:Did you see Franklin's TD run? He broke about three tackles just carrying guys.

I think he's the best RB Stanford has faced all year.

By not giving Franklin very many touches at all in the second half, Mora clearly was playing for Nov. 30.

I agree with a lot of your post, including the part about Franklin being a great back, but not necessarily about the lack of touches in the 2nd half.  I think once the game got to 35-10, Mora had the offense passing the ball more.  Also, as good as Franklin is, he only ended up averaging 3 yards per carry, and that included the 11 yard touchdown run.  He's good, and I'm sure they'll try getting the ball in his hands a lot.  But I think we can stop him. 



My impressions - JohnR34231 - 11-25-2012

The better team won.

However, if they play extremely well, and we don't, they are capable of upsetting us.

So I hope we are ready for another big effort on Friday. I think we will be, with the Rose Bowl at stake.

Re: Final: Stanford 35, UCLA 17 - Oasis - 11-25-2012

UCLA is capable of burning our defense with big plays.  Their receivers match up well vs. our corners.  Our advantages are in pressuring Hundley and in our ability to fill the gaps vs. the running game -- and in the power and versatility of our offense .  Although Hundley is very athletic and escaped what I thought were about to be several gruesome sacks, as my son pointed out to me, while he is doing that he is not able to find receivers.  And we sacked him 7 times.  The UCLA fans were going berzerk over all the holding penalties, but holding was the UCLA offense's response to our pass rush and the way the run D plugs the gaps.

Franklin is very good and can slip past a blitz and is quick to get outside.  Once he is in the open field, or if he has the ghost of a hole to run through, he is dangerous. But like most running backs, his success ultimately depends on his offensive line and Stanford clearly dominated the line of scrimmage.

The Hundley-Franklin circus will probably hurt us some on Friday.  But as we did last night, we can contain them.

When Stepfan's blockers held their blocks, he looked like Ernie Nevers.  Watching at the stadium has some advantages, one being that you can see some plays develop from a vantage point the TV camera doesn't provide.  On Stepfan's long TD run in the first half from where we were we could see the hole open, and that was it.  He ran through some arm tackles and then just outran the UCLA secondary.  On the near-TD run in the second half, he had a convoy of blockers before he broke loose from everyone and in that situation there is no bringing him down.  UCLA stopped him when they shed their blocks -- as they often did -- and he had to pile into a group of defenders with no blocking help.

The worrisome part of last night is our injuries. Zychlinski is the holder for the temperamental Williamson, whose FG attempt with #14 holding was not even close.

We won because we had the better team.  One more win vs. UCLA and we'll all be back at the Rose Bowl.  Which, in my opinion, is why Stanford plays football.

It was beautiful day and a delightful evening for football.  The Band did not show up.  But there was a good-sized Stanford crowd in the north end zone.  We sat directly across from them.  It does one's heart good to see the team go over to the Stanford section after a win.

Last night was the swan song for UCLA's "Mr. 8-Clap" who has been rallying the UCLA fans as a sort of alum cheerleader for 40 years.  I remember him from as far back as the early 80s.

Re: Final: Stanford 35, UCLA 17 - 81alum - 11-25-2012

If I were a coach and trying to find things to be concerned about....

1. I would be concerned that early in the game the UCLA line stuffed our running game.  Even on our first scoring drive we got repeatedly tackled for losses.  I hope we can figure out our blocking schemes by Friday.

2. I would be concerned lest the next officiating crew is lenient on calling holding penalties.  If UCLA gets away with all of those holds then their offense would have looked a lot better--several big plays came back.  We have to shed blocks better--even when held.

3. I would be concerned about the punting game, if our punter is out.  It is a big, big drop off.

4. I would be concerned about our woeful play from wide receivers.  UCLA absolutely can single cover our wide receivers and stack the box--until we catch a few.  We need to do something to improve wide receiver play, which may have just gotten harder with a possible Terrell injury.  Some of this has to do with the receivers, but some of it may have to do with Hogan being inexperienced and more comfortable throwing to the TEs.  In either case, they need to get on the same page, and the WRs need to actually catch balls that hit them in the hands.

5. I would be concerned about complacency.  Next time, the UCLA players have a lot more to play for, and their coaches will have no reason to hold anything back.  They will have a much easier time scheming now that they have the "data" of how the individual matchups worked in the first game.  I would guess that UCLA will play much better the second time around.

6. I would be concerned about turnovers.  We would probably have lost the game to UCLA had they gotten all 4 balls we put on the ground plus the one they put on the ground.  We got lucky getting 4 of the 5 balls that were fumbled, but we can't count on that happening again. 

Re: Final: Stanford 35, UCLA 17 - Roberton3 - 11-25-2012

(11-24-2012, 10:46 PM)needle link Wrote:Did you see Franklin's TD run? He broke about three tackles just carrying guys.

I think he's the best RB Stanford has faced all year.

By not giving Franklin very many touches at all in the second half, Mora clearly was playing for Nov. 30.

If you're playing for next week, you don't leave your starting quarterback in the game, and you definitely don't leave him in a game in which he's getting sacked repeatedly.  So either Mora is the dumbest coach ever or he was still trying hard to win the game.  My bet would be on the latter.

Re: Final: Stanford 35, UCLA 17 - Roberton3 - 11-25-2012

(11-25-2012, 08:17 AM)Oasis link Wrote:The worrisome part of last night is our injuries. Zychlinski is the holder for the temperamental Williamson, whose FG attempt with #14 holding was not even close.

Not to nitpick, but that FG attempt hit the crossbar.  If that's "not even close" then what is?

Re: Final: Stanford 35, UCLA 17 - washingtonismoney - 11-25-2012

It's easy for me to foresee how UCLA might win. Hundley made some ridiculous throws throughout the game; I've seen some suggestion in some Bruins places that Stanford's DBs were edged a bit, but I thought Hundley threw a lot of guys open. On one hand, Hundley's capable of doing that frequently and could theoretically do it just enough to win. On the other hand, I think our tackling was just so-so. Given the excellence of the tackling in the really big, important games, I guess the defense to clamp down even more tightly on Friday.

Offensively, we are what we are. Hogan has improved the offense greatly, but the limitations in terms of the number of playmakers and the question marks about his ability to be accurate on deep balls will put a cap on how good we can be this year. While we were somewhat vanilla on Saturday, I'd be surprised by a dramatically better effort offensively -- with maybe the caveats being the possibility of a much-improved offensive line performance, and the (fainter) possibilities of Ty Montgomery waking up on the right side of the bed and/or a Kelsey Young breakout game. (Just me, or interesting that Young only got the one touch, somewhat late in the game? Would put down in the "purposefully vanilla" category, though I'm being optimistic.)

Re: Final: Stanford 35, UCLA 17 - terry - 11-25-2012

(11-25-2012, 07:02 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:While we were somewhat vanilla on Saturday, I'd be surprised by a dramatically better effort offensively

We shut down our offense halfway through the third quarter. We could do better on Friday if we just play offense for all four quarters.

Re: Final: Stanford 35, UCLA 17 - washingtonismoney - 11-25-2012

(11-25-2012, 07:44 PM)terry link Wrote:We shut down our offense halfway through the third quarter. We could do better on Friday if we just play offense for all four quarters.

It looked to me like UCLA's DL took the effort/intensity down a notch against us. They mauled us early. Needs to change Friday.