08-24-2025, 11:57 AM
7. That QB play understandably is dominating the conversation right now. As I said above, in conventional stats it really doesn't get much worse. In my preferred stat of Total QBR it was a horrific performance but somewhat hyperbolic to call it the worst QB game in Stanford history. In the Taylor era alone we've had worse games by Lamson against both Sacramento State and Oregon State and last year's TCU (Daniels) and SMU (Brown) games were probably better but very similar to what we saw yesterday. Historically, I can do the full grisly list if and when the board history and search function gets restored but at a minimum Total QBR had the infamous Jack West game far worse (5.6!). In any case, that these are the comparisons drives home the point that Gulbranson played historically awfully. The question animating many is what to do going forward. IMHO the impulse to go with Brown is misguided. Yesterday shouldn't make us feel we were sold a bill of good and Gulbranson is a bum incapable of solid play. It's not actually even the worst game of his career - that would be 2022 against Oregon. He also had horrible games last year against San Jose State, 2022 against Washington, and 2022 against Utah. He is very capable of awful performances. We should not have deluded ourselves into thinking otherwise. At the same time, we still have solid evidence to think he is a better option than our alternatives. Looking at all performances with 10+ pass attempts, Gulbranson's career median is now 59.6 in 15 such games, which compares to 69.7 for Rizk in 5 such games (intriguing, but small sample) and a 15.4 for Brown in his only such game (and a 12.8 in a 9 attempt game. [Daniels is not an option for us anymore but for context his median is 52.9/54.3 in 18 such games.] The fundamentals of our room haven't changed: extremely qualified QB evaluating minds thought Gulbranson was clearly the choice, the backup some are pining for has been this level of awful in literally every FBS game he's ever played whereas Gulbranson has been substantially better a dozen times, and there are profound problems with both our offensive line and receiving corps that should make us doubt whether any of these guys will succeed. We don't have good options but I still think the choice is clear to ride with Gulbranson, at least for now. That said, this performance and the likelihood BYU will be ugly increases the chances of us playing some QB musical chairs with everybody failing.
8. There has not been nearly enough talk of our skill position ineptitude as a factor in yesterday's performance. Gulbranson threw bad balls and undoubtedly played poorly, but Roush, Williams, and Onovughe all came up meek and failing in contested catch opportunities (Hall too but at least he drew a flag) and all of those guys plus High, Farrell, and Blackburn weren't doing much to get open. I think the sad fact is that we have a miserable assortment of passing weapons and that is going to make any QB look worse than he is. Still, it's only one game and I hope all these guys do much more damage from here on out. Just sobering to have these struggles against a Group of Five team knowing what's ahead. The skill position players deserving of shout outs are of course the RBs. Ford - second 100 yard game of his career, only RB we've had do that since Filkins against Washington 2022 and our first RB touchdown in many moons - was the clear player of the game but Irvin moved the chains a lot too and Tabb was good in his limited opportunities. [Moving the chains (first down) leaderboard: Ford (9), Irvin (4), Williams (2, though one lucky to be ruled a catch), Holt, High, Tabb, and Hall drew a pass interference] I want to see what this looks like against real power defenses but so far so good in that room. It is fraught to highlight PFF grades with such a small sample and before the tape gets re-reviewed/vetted/confirmed, but for what it's worth PFF thought Prongos, Anderson (in limited backup duty), House (in duty limited by being pulled....injured?), and Fattig played well, Brown played solidly (which is encouraging for a redshirt freshman), and Pale was the weak link but not a liability. Again, I want to see what this looks like against a real front.
9. The defense was not as bad as the offense but I did not love how few players on the defense positively impacted the game. There were only five guys who showed up with multiple positive plays in the box score (Rose, Barth, Patterson, Galvan, Buckey), which is really not good. The standout was Rose with two tackles for loss including a sack, a third down tackle to force a punt, and three other stops. He also had an unnecessary roughness but that was a judgment call and definitely didn't outweigh his excellent contributions. I know many fans view Patterson's unsportsmanlike as outweighing his contributions, but giving us that touchdown and sniffing out the trick play to what would have been devastating effect were arguably our two biggest defensive plays of the game. We should note that as we look for guys who can make plays. He made them. In general, the ILBs were a strong point with Barth having a stop, crunch time sack, and crunch time third down stop to force a field goal and Mattingly having the great fourth down stop, and Galvan making a few plays (and PFF really liked his play). PFF really liked Staples' contributions, which I didn't notice on tv or in the box score. I am very bummed the OLBs (all of them) disrupted as little as they did. Leigber also had a disappointing game.
10. Kenney made field goals of 23 and 46 but the big story is of course the blocked field goal, one of several plays in the game we can call the difference. Flintoft had net punts of 41 to the 42 (solid), 40 to the 42 (solid), 34 to the 36 (mediocre at best), and 44 to the 28 outkicking coverage in crunch time (the return made me nervous but will always take net 44). We lost field position on special teams numerous ways, including the punt unit delay of game, Dubre's punt block offsides, and both of Tabb's returns (a 19 yarder and a 9 yarder that added up to 9 yards worse field position than fair catches would have). The tackling was ok but not great on coverage, with Mattingly and Doyle bringing guys down but not positive results for us. Farrell fell down on his 4 yard punt return and did get us a couple yards past fair catch territory with the 19 yard kick return.
11. Game balls: Ford, Rose, Flintoft, Agnew
12. No choice but to go forward and see what can be salvaged. Hopefully we can do enough to make this year not feel like a total waste and, even if it does feel like a lost year of delay in getting a post-Taylor staff, maybe we can do enough to make football at Stanford a tolerable enough experience that guys like Ford and the offensive linemen don't want to transfer out. There is a lot of season left and I hope the coaches and players buckle down and make the naysayers look foolish. A lot can happen in 11 games. Right now I don't see where a respectable team comes from but maybe they can shock the world. Having a bye to improve health and make adjustments, with an NFL head coach, is not nothing. Regardless, I won't give up on this program even if I feel like this year is mostly spinning wheels to turn a new page.
8. There has not been nearly enough talk of our skill position ineptitude as a factor in yesterday's performance. Gulbranson threw bad balls and undoubtedly played poorly, but Roush, Williams, and Onovughe all came up meek and failing in contested catch opportunities (Hall too but at least he drew a flag) and all of those guys plus High, Farrell, and Blackburn weren't doing much to get open. I think the sad fact is that we have a miserable assortment of passing weapons and that is going to make any QB look worse than he is. Still, it's only one game and I hope all these guys do much more damage from here on out. Just sobering to have these struggles against a Group of Five team knowing what's ahead. The skill position players deserving of shout outs are of course the RBs. Ford - second 100 yard game of his career, only RB we've had do that since Filkins against Washington 2022 and our first RB touchdown in many moons - was the clear player of the game but Irvin moved the chains a lot too and Tabb was good in his limited opportunities. [Moving the chains (first down) leaderboard: Ford (9), Irvin (4), Williams (2, though one lucky to be ruled a catch), Holt, High, Tabb, and Hall drew a pass interference] I want to see what this looks like against real power defenses but so far so good in that room. It is fraught to highlight PFF grades with such a small sample and before the tape gets re-reviewed/vetted/confirmed, but for what it's worth PFF thought Prongos, Anderson (in limited backup duty), House (in duty limited by being pulled....injured?), and Fattig played well, Brown played solidly (which is encouraging for a redshirt freshman), and Pale was the weak link but not a liability. Again, I want to see what this looks like against a real front.
9. The defense was not as bad as the offense but I did not love how few players on the defense positively impacted the game. There were only five guys who showed up with multiple positive plays in the box score (Rose, Barth, Patterson, Galvan, Buckey), which is really not good. The standout was Rose with two tackles for loss including a sack, a third down tackle to force a punt, and three other stops. He also had an unnecessary roughness but that was a judgment call and definitely didn't outweigh his excellent contributions. I know many fans view Patterson's unsportsmanlike as outweighing his contributions, but giving us that touchdown and sniffing out the trick play to what would have been devastating effect were arguably our two biggest defensive plays of the game. We should note that as we look for guys who can make plays. He made them. In general, the ILBs were a strong point with Barth having a stop, crunch time sack, and crunch time third down stop to force a field goal and Mattingly having the great fourth down stop, and Galvan making a few plays (and PFF really liked his play). PFF really liked Staples' contributions, which I didn't notice on tv or in the box score. I am very bummed the OLBs (all of them) disrupted as little as they did. Leigber also had a disappointing game.
10. Kenney made field goals of 23 and 46 but the big story is of course the blocked field goal, one of several plays in the game we can call the difference. Flintoft had net punts of 41 to the 42 (solid), 40 to the 42 (solid), 34 to the 36 (mediocre at best), and 44 to the 28 outkicking coverage in crunch time (the return made me nervous but will always take net 44). We lost field position on special teams numerous ways, including the punt unit delay of game, Dubre's punt block offsides, and both of Tabb's returns (a 19 yarder and a 9 yarder that added up to 9 yards worse field position than fair catches would have). The tackling was ok but not great on coverage, with Mattingly and Doyle bringing guys down but not positive results for us. Farrell fell down on his 4 yard punt return and did get us a couple yards past fair catch territory with the 19 yard kick return.
11. Game balls: Ford, Rose, Flintoft, Agnew
12. No choice but to go forward and see what can be salvaged. Hopefully we can do enough to make this year not feel like a total waste and, even if it does feel like a lost year of delay in getting a post-Taylor staff, maybe we can do enough to make football at Stanford a tolerable enough experience that guys like Ford and the offensive linemen don't want to transfer out. There is a lot of season left and I hope the coaches and players buckle down and make the naysayers look foolish. A lot can happen in 11 games. Right now I don't see where a respectable team comes from but maybe they can shock the world. Having a bye to improve health and make adjustments, with an NFL head coach, is not nothing. Regardless, I won't give up on this program even if I feel like this year is mostly spinning wheels to turn a new page.