[Austroturf]

I also don't struggle with the heart and head thing.  I always want Stanford to win, even when the game is utterly painful to watch.  And since nothing seems to affect the administration's view of Teflon Shaw, well, why not enjoy a few ugly wins along the way?  

All that said, I can only agree with many of Matt's points: 1) absolutely Shawful offense, with now 115 minutes of play without a TD!  The ability to finish a drive seems to have completely eluded McKee and Co.  To see them move the ball down the field and stall each time is just wretched.  When Shaw put Daniels in on such an obvious Wildcat run, I knew we would be limited to FG #2.  I frankly don't know why he calls that play...ever.    2) So, yes, thank the stars for a reliable kicker like Karty.  If ASU had had a Karty on its roster, we would have lost, because their man came up short in the waning minutes of H1.  Those three points would have made the difference. And 3) the defense came through with a number of standout performances.  It didn't look good in the early phase of the game, but they regrouped and clamped down in the final 44 minutes of play. Yes, it almost went pear-shaped in the end, with a distinct Beaver-vibe in the stadium; but Badger's right foot had chalk all over it, and victory was barely preserved from the jaws of defeat.

Stanford stadium was a relatively barren cavern with two decidedly mediocre teams trading blows on a beautiful October afternoon.  Yes, one of them had to win, and it was the good guys this time.  Always happy for a W.  Not happy with where the program is.  I expect UCLA to carve us up next week.  But the Bruins didn't exactly light Autzen stadium up on Saturday, so in this very weird year of football, maybe we can surprise to the upside again.  I will be rooting for Stanford, even though I would love to see the program under new leadership.  Guess that's my conflict.

And, as usual, thanks for the insights, Matt.

[Austroturf]

I also don't struggle with the heart and head thing.  I always want Stanford to win, even when the game is utterly painful to watch.  And since nothing seems to affect the administration's view of Teflon Shaw, well, why not enjoy a few ugly wins along the way?  

All that said, I can only agree with many of Matt's points: 1) absolutely Shawful offense, with now 115 minutes of play without a TD!  The ability to finish a drive seems to have completely eluded McKee and Co.  To see them move the ball down the field and stall each time is just wretched.  When Shaw put Daniels in on such an obvious Wildcat run, I knew we would be limited to FG #2.  I frankly don't know why he calls that play...ever.    2) So, yes, thank the stars for a reliable kicker like Karty.  If ASU had had a Karty on its roster, we would have lost, because their man came up short in the waning minutes of H1.  Those three points would have made the difference. And 3) the defense came through with a number of standout performances.  It didn't look good in the early phase of the game, but they regrouped and clamped down in the final 44 minutes of play. Yes, it almost went pear-shaped in the end, with a distinct Beaver-vibe in the stadium; but Badger's right foot had chalk all over it, and victory was barely preserved from the jaws of defeat.

Stanford stadium was a relatively barren cavern with two decidedly mediocre teams trading blows on a beautiful October afternoon.  Yes, one of them had to win, and it was the good guys this time.  Always happy for a W.  Not happy with where the program is.  I expect UCLA to carve us up next week.  But the Bruins didn't exactly light Autzen stadium up on Saturday, so in this very weird year of football, maybe we can surprise to the upside again.  I will be rooting for Stanford, even though I would love to see the program under new leadership.  Guess that's my conflict.

And, as usual, thanks for the insights, Matt.