[washingtonismoney]

The defense gave up 6 points in the second half, both off of turnovers that left them defending a short field. They weren't great in the first half, but really, our offense ought to be able to score more 14 points per half. Had they done that we win by two scores.

Points scored can be a volatile measure. There's skill in finishing (or not finishing) drives, but a small error can ruin an otherwise-good drive for you. And ultimately, what's important is the ability to have lots more good plays than bad. That's why I like yards per play as an underlying metric -- with Stanford's 6.9 being excellent (to 5.6 being not so much).

What's most disturbing to me is that Stanford's defense keeps on being victimized by the same play -- motioning a man out of the backfield onto the flanks. We've seen this motion extensively since the UCLA game and have nothing to combat it. This is disturbing. Whatever you might say about the offense, but the errors aren't generally conceptual. Moreover, the problems with last year's offense -- a lack of deep threat, too many sacks -- have been addressed and ameliorated. Things aren't great or perfect, by any means, but I think things are moving in the right direction. That's not the case with the defense, where we've been unable to deal with a specific kind of play, where most of the players seem to have stagnated or regressed, and where there's a lack of trustworthy defensive linemen.

[washingtonismoney]

The defense gave up 6 points in the second half, both off of turnovers that left them defending a short field. They weren't great in the first half, but really, our offense ought to be able to score more 14 points per half. Had they done that we win by two scores.

Points scored can be a volatile measure. There's skill in finishing (or not finishing) drives, but a small error can ruin an otherwise-good drive for you. And ultimately, what's important is the ability to have lots more good plays than bad. That's why I like yards per play as an underlying metric -- with Stanford's 6.9 being excellent (to 5.6 being not so much).

What's most disturbing to me is that Stanford's defense keeps on being victimized by the same play -- motioning a man out of the backfield onto the flanks. We've seen this motion extensively since the UCLA game and have nothing to combat it. This is disturbing. Whatever you might say about the offense, but the errors aren't generally conceptual. Moreover, the problems with last year's offense -- a lack of deep threat, too many sacks -- have been addressed and ameliorated. Things aren't great or perfect, by any means, but I think things are moving in the right direction. That's not the case with the defense, where we've been unable to deal with a specific kind of play, where most of the players seem to have stagnated or regressed, and where there's a lack of trustworthy defensive linemen.