[CTcard]

It was maddening to see Stanford rush three against what seemed to be a UCLA max protect, giving Rosen all day to find receivers.  But a win affords the chance to learn less painfully, so Akina has probably already hammered a few lessons home.

I am a little confused what lesson Akina has hammered home here. I don't think he calls blitzes/rush schemes.

But Rosen had a relatively strong game against us - his most efficient game this year. I think a little of that was corners playing soft after Holder and Meeks went out and Rosen hitting a bunch of stuff underneath. The biggest issue was we seemed to decide not to cover their tight ends. So there's room for Akina to work on those issues. 

In the first quarter, I seem to remember two back-to-back CMac runs of 10+ yards.  That was some precision offensive run-blocking.  Where did that go later?

It never really left, as others have noted. McCaffrey averaged 5.2 yards per carry and Love 10.2. That's a strong basic run game.

When we show run and UCLA stacks the box, why do we not play-action fake to the TE throw?

We did a little (not necessarily always to the TE), but it's clear that Shaw doesn't really trust Burns to carry very much offensive load yet and in that game the lack of trust was mostly justified. Before the last drive, Burns was 8/17 for 71 yards, 0 TD and 1 INT. That won't cut it.

Great execution on that last drive.  Just need to see that all the time against UW.  Husky Stadium will be hostile.

It was beautiful. We all hope that will give the whole offense a ton of confidence. and confidence in Burns, which will lead to a big uptick in the pass game.

One interesting aspect of the drive was that many of the passes were not particularly well placed, but at least the completed ones were good enough and Irwin and Arcega-Whiteside made plays (of course that doesn't include the TD pass which was exactly where it needed to be). I'm not sure there is any lesson there ... perhaps that trying to be perfect is sometimes the enemy of being good enough.

[CTcard]

It was maddening to see Stanford rush three against what seemed to be a UCLA max protect, giving Rosen all day to find receivers.  But a win affords the chance to learn less painfully, so Akina has probably already hammered a few lessons home.

I am a little confused what lesson Akina has hammered home here. I don't think he calls blitzes/rush schemes.

But Rosen had a relatively strong game against us - his most efficient game this year. I think a little of that was corners playing soft after Holder and Meeks went out and Rosen hitting a bunch of stuff underneath. The biggest issue was we seemed to decide not to cover their tight ends. So there's room for Akina to work on those issues. 

In the first quarter, I seem to remember two back-to-back CMac runs of 10+ yards.  That was some precision offensive run-blocking.  Where did that go later?

It never really left, as others have noted. McCaffrey averaged 5.2 yards per carry and Love 10.2. That's a strong basic run game.

When we show run and UCLA stacks the box, why do we not play-action fake to the TE throw?

We did a little (not necessarily always to the TE), but it's clear that Shaw doesn't really trust Burns to carry very much offensive load yet and in that game the lack of trust was mostly justified. Before the last drive, Burns was 8/17 for 71 yards, 0 TD and 1 INT. That won't cut it.

Great execution on that last drive.  Just need to see that all the time against UW.  Husky Stadium will be hostile.

It was beautiful. We all hope that will give the whole offense a ton of confidence. and confidence in Burns, which will lead to a big uptick in the pass game.

One interesting aspect of the drive was that many of the passes were not particularly well placed, but at least the completed ones were good enough and Irwin and Arcega-Whiteside made plays (of course that doesn't include the TD pass which was exactly where it needed to be). I'm not sure there is any lesson there ... perhaps that trying to be perfect is sometimes the enemy of being good enough.