[Goose]

I always find these thoughts to be interesting and, well, thoughtful. I am going to propose a different evaluation of Stanford's defensive performance and see what people think. Bad weather is normally considered to favor a running team, which neither Stanford nor WSU are. In this game, because of Lamson, Stanford was slightly "better" than WSU.

Both teams seemed to me to be playing a lot of the game at 7/8s speed. It was as if the footing wasn't good and this particularly affected the WSU passing offense. Lots of their passes seemed to be thrown a bit behind or a bit in front of the receivers. More importantly, one of the Stanford's defensive issues is lack of speed in the secondary. The DB are often more or less in the "right place" but are a step behind / away from the receiver. They often can't knock the pass away. Against WSU, the slightly slower pace seemed to allow the DBs to actually be closer to the receivers in general and provide much "tighter" coverage. This resulted in more passes defended. It wasn't that we were suddenly "better", but rather that WSU couldn't get open by simply running away from us. They also weren't getting to the spot they were expected to be "on time". This resulted in the QB missing throws and also holding the ball longer than normal, which helped the pass rush. His "hot read" often had a Stanford defender right there.

Both offenses were not good (to be charitable), but I admit that I just don't believe Stanford could suddenly cover WSUs receivers because we improved that much. I am indeed giving a lot of credit to the weather. It affected both team's passing game similarly. We had a hard time too. Stanford's defense did play well, but they had "help" from the weather. I don't think it translates into a "lock down" pass defense in the future.

Thoughts welcome!

[Goose]

I always find these thoughts to be interesting and, well, thoughtful. I am going to propose a different evaluation of Stanford's defensive performance and see what people think. Bad weather is normally considered to favor a running team, which neither Stanford nor WSU are. In this game, because of Lamson, Stanford was slightly "better" than WSU.

Both teams seemed to me to be playing a lot of the game at 7/8s speed. It was as if the footing wasn't good and this particularly affected the WSU passing offense. Lots of their passes seemed to be thrown a bit behind or a bit in front of the receivers. More importantly, one of the Stanford's defensive issues is lack of speed in the secondary. The DB are often more or less in the "right place" but are a step behind / away from the receiver. They often can't knock the pass away. Against WSU, the slightly slower pace seemed to allow the DBs to actually be closer to the receivers in general and provide much "tighter" coverage. This resulted in more passes defended. It wasn't that we were suddenly "better", but rather that WSU couldn't get open by simply running away from us. They also weren't getting to the spot they were expected to be "on time". This resulted in the QB missing throws and also holding the ball longer than normal, which helped the pass rush. His "hot read" often had a Stanford defender right there.

Both offenses were not good (to be charitable), but I admit that I just don't believe Stanford could suddenly cover WSUs receivers because we improved that much. I am indeed giving a lot of credit to the weather. It affected both team's passing game similarly. We had a hard time too. Stanford's defense did play well, but they had "help" from the weather. I don't think it translates into a "lock down" pass defense in the future.

Thoughts welcome!