[washingtonismoney]

Ok, I overestimated the number of Stanford punts.  Three drives ended in punts, four ended in touchdowns, one ended in a FG (wtf Shaw), and one ended in an INT.  So we didn't punt as often as I thought we did, and thus our offense was able to sustain drives better.  Only the 50-yd McCaff score was a drive that depended on a single play--I'm a big fan of sustained drives that demonstrate ability to execute.

Check out the automated playbook summary at the end of the box score: http://www.gostanford.com/ViewContent.db...=1487364.  Gives you the down-distance run/play formation numbers.

Sure. I'm a big fan of scoring myself. And we did more of it than UW has surrendered all year.

[washingtonismoney]

Ok, I overestimated the number of Stanford punts.  Three drives ended in punts, four ended in touchdowns, one ended in a FG (wtf Shaw), and one ended in an INT.  So we didn't punt as often as I thought we did, and thus our offense was able to sustain drives better.  Only the 50-yd McCaff score was a drive that depended on a single play--I'm a big fan of sustained drives that demonstrate ability to execute.

Check out the automated playbook summary at the end of the box score: http://www.gostanford.com/ViewContent.db...=1487364.  Gives you the down-distance run/play formation numbers.

Sure. I'm a big fan of scoring myself. And we did more of it than UW has surrendered all year.