[lex24]

That game provided a great example of why Stanford power running ball control philosophy has worked over the years.  The defense was simply on the field way too much. Stanford could not come close to matching TCUs speed.

This year Stanford lost the ability for the most part to control clock. Much of their offense was based on the big play. A couple big losses were because the defense simply couldn’t get off the field. And the offense couldn’t  sustain long drives.

Last night was like watching a game from yesteryear. You knew the defense was in trouble. Speed differential was brobdingnagian. I texted a friend early in 3d that it would take at least 45 to win. I was, unfortunately, right

Next years charge offensively is to get back to being able to control clock. I think to do that they will need to have not only a more consistent run game; but a more efficient pass game. With a higher completion percentage. I’d like to see the FB become a receiver again. More use of the TEs and a commitment to the short and intermediate pass game.

This was, to me, the most frustrating year of the Shaw era. They have been pretty darn good at winning the tight games. Not this year  Still 9-5.  Good year. Just so close to being a great one.

[lex24]

That game provided a great example of why Stanford power running ball control philosophy has worked over the years.  The defense was simply on the field way too much. Stanford could not come close to matching TCUs speed.

This year Stanford lost the ability for the most part to control clock. Much of their offense was based on the big play. A couple big losses were because the defense simply couldn’t get off the field. And the offense couldn’t  sustain long drives.

Last night was like watching a game from yesteryear. You knew the defense was in trouble. Speed differential was brobdingnagian. I texted a friend early in 3d that it would take at least 45 to win. I was, unfortunately, right

Next years charge offensively is to get back to being able to control clock. I think to do that they will need to have not only a more consistent run game; but a more efficient pass game. With a higher completion percentage. I’d like to see the FB become a receiver again. More use of the TEs and a commitment to the short and intermediate pass game.

This was, to me, the most frustrating year of the Shaw era. They have been pretty darn good at winning the tight games. Not this year  Still 9-5.  Good year. Just so close to being a great one.

[lex24]

That game provided a great example of why Stanford power running ball control philosophy has worked over the years.  The defense was simply on the field way too much. Stanford could not come close to matching TCUs speed.

This year Stanford lost the ability for the most part to control clock. Much of their offense was based on the big play. A couple big losses were because the defense simply couldn’t get off the field. And the offense couldn’t  sustain long drives.

Last night was like watching a game from yesteryear. You knew the defense was in trouble. Speed differential was brobdingnagian. I texted a friend early in 3d that it would take at least 45 to win. I was, unfortunately, right

Next years charge offensively is to get back to being able to control clock. I think to do that they will need to have not only a more consistent run game; but a more efficient pass game. With a higher completion percentage. I’d like to see the FB become a receiver again. More use of the TEs and a commitment to the short and intermediate pass game.

This was, to me, the most frustrating year of the Shaw era. They have been pretty darn good at winning the tight games. Not this year  Still 9-5.  Good year. Just so close to being a great one.

[lex24]

That game provided a great example of why Stanford power running ball control philosophy has worked over the years.  The defense was simply on the field way too much. Stanford could not come close to matching TCUs speed.

This year Stanford lost the ability for the most part to control clock. Much of their offense was based on the big play. A couple big losses were because the defense simply couldn’t get off the field. And the offense couldn’t  sustain long drives.

Last night was like watching a game from yesteryear. You knew the defense was in trouble. Speed differential was brobdingnagian. I texted a friend early in 3d that it would take at least 45 to win. I was, unfortunately, right

Next years charge offensively is to get back to being able to control clock. I think to do that they will need to have not only a more consistent run game; but a more efficient pass game. With a higher completion percentage. I’d like to see the FB become a receiver again. More use of the TEs and a commitment to the short and intermediate pass game.

This was, to me, the most frustrating year of the Shaw era. They have been pretty darn good at winning the tight games. Not this year  Still 9-5.  Good year. Just so close to being a great one.

[Mick]

A line from "Brian's Song" has stuck with me over the years.  Brian Piccolo is talking with Gale Sayers and says, "I know I can't get a sixty yard run, but I can get six yards ten times, and they still add up the same way."

Our defense isn't very deep.  The longer our defense is on the field, the worse it is for us.  I wonder how we'll do, once we're past the Bryce Love era, but still have running backs averaging 4.5 yards or better, chewing up the clock?

BTW, speaking of Gale Sayers...my dad was a WR and best friends with Bob Berry, the QB at Willow Glen HS when they won 44 games in a row (and were finally beaten by a Bill Walsh coached team).  Bob was an All-American at Oregon and went on to a lengthy career with the Vikings and Falcons.  In those pre-media days, there was very little information on the athletes, and Bob had just been named to the West team for the 1965 East-West shrine game.  Butkus and Staubach were on the East team and Berry, Craig Morton of C.al, and Bob Nichols, Dick Ragsdale and Jack Chapple of Stanford were on the West team.  Dad and Berry and some of their former HS teammates were sitting around a kitchen table and talking about the all-stars and who really stood out.  My dad asked Berry who the best players were, and Bob said "Well, they're all pretty good.  But there's this running back from Kansas named Gale Sayers who's head and shoulders above everyone else."

[Mick]

A line from "Brian's Song" has stuck with me over the years.  Brian Piccolo is talking with Gale Sayers and says, "I know I can't get a sixty yard run, but I can get six yards ten times, and they still add up the same way."

Our defense isn't very deep.  The longer our defense is on the field, the worse it is for us.  I wonder how we'll do, once we're past the Bryce Love era, but still have running backs averaging 4.5 yards or better, chewing up the clock?

BTW, speaking of Gale Sayers...my dad was a WR and best friends with Bob Berry, the QB at Willow Glen HS when they won 44 games in a row (and were finally beaten by a Bill Walsh coached team).  Bob was an All-American at Oregon and went on to a lengthy career with the Vikings and Falcons.  In those pre-media days, there was very little information on the athletes, and Bob had just been named to the West team for the 1965 East-West shrine game.  Butkus and Staubach were on the East team and Berry, Craig Morton of C.al, and Bob Nichols, Dick Ragsdale and Jack Chapple of Stanford were on the West team.  Dad and Berry and some of their former HS teammates were sitting around a kitchen table and talking about the all-stars and who really stood out.  My dad asked Berry who the best players were, and Bob said "Well, they're all pretty good.  But there's this running back from Kansas named Gale Sayers who's head and shoulders above everyone else."

[Mick]

A line from "Brian's Song" has stuck with me over the years.  Brian Piccolo is talking with Gale Sayers and says, "I know I can't get a sixty yard run, but I can get six yards ten times, and they still add up the same way."

Our defense isn't very deep.  The longer our defense is on the field, the worse it is for us.  I wonder how we'll do, once we're past the Bryce Love era, but still have running backs averaging 4.5 yards or better, chewing up the clock?

BTW, speaking of Gale Sayers...my dad was a WR and best friends with Bob Berry, the QB at Willow Glen HS when they won 44 games in a row (and were finally beaten by a Bill Walsh coached team).  Bob was an All-American at Oregon and went on to a lengthy career with the Vikings and Falcons.  In those pre-media days, there was very little information on the athletes, and Bob had just been named to the West team for the 1965 East-West shrine game.  Butkus and Staubach were on the East team and Berry, Craig Morton of C.al, and Bob Nichols, Dick Ragsdale and Jack Chapple of Stanford were on the West team.  Dad and Berry and some of their former HS teammates were sitting around a kitchen table and talking about the all-stars and who really stood out.  My dad asked Berry who the best players were, and Bob said "Well, they're all pretty good.  But there's this running back from Kansas named Gale Sayers who's head and shoulders above everyone else."

[Mick]

A line from "Brian's Song" has stuck with me over the years.  Brian Piccolo is talking with Gale Sayers and says, "I know I can't get a sixty yard run, but I can get six yards ten times, and they still add up the same way."

Our defense isn't very deep.  The longer our defense is on the field, the worse it is for us.  I wonder how we'll do, once we're past the Bryce Love era, but still have running backs averaging 4.5 yards or better, chewing up the clock?

BTW, speaking of Gale Sayers...my dad was a WR and best friends with Bob Berry, the QB at Willow Glen HS when they won 44 games in a row (and were finally beaten by a Bill Walsh coached team).  Bob was an All-American at Oregon and went on to a lengthy career with the Vikings and Falcons.  In those pre-media days, there was very little information on the athletes, and Bob had just been named to the West team for the 1965 East-West shrine game.  Butkus and Staubach were on the East team and Berry, Craig Morton of C.al, and Bob Nichols, Dick Ragsdale and Jack Chapple of Stanford were on the West team.  Dad and Berry and some of their former HS teammates were sitting around a kitchen table and talking about the all-stars and who really stood out.  My dad asked Berry who the best players were, and Bob said "Well, they're all pretty good.  But there's this running back from Kansas named Gale Sayers who's head and shoulders above everyone else."

[lex24]

Great story. Sayers was unreal. Unfortunately he got that knee injury against the Niners. Never was the same.

A line from "Brian's Song" has stuck with me over the years.  Brian Piccolo is talking with Gale Sayers and says, "I know I can't get a sixty yard run, but I can get six yards ten times, and they still add up the same way."

Our defense isn't very deep.  The longer our defense is on the field, the worse it is for us.  I wonder how we'll do, once we're past the Bryce Love era, but still have running backs averaging 4.5 yards or better, chewing up the clock?

BTW, speaking of Gale Sayers...my dad was a WR and best friends with Bob Berry, the QB at Willow Glen HS when they won 44 games in a row (and were finally beaten by a Bill Walsh coached team).  Bob was an All-American at Oregon and went on to a lengthy career with the Vikings and Falcons.  In those pre-media days, there was very little information on the athletes, and Bob had just been named to the West team for the 1965 East-West shrine game.  Butkus and Staubach were on the East team and Berry, Craig Morton of C.al, and Bob Nichols, Richard Ragsdale and Jack Chapple of Stanford were on the West team.  Dad and Berry and some of their former HS teammates were sitting around a kitchen table and talking about the all-stars and who really stood out.  My dad asked Berry who the best players were, and Bob said "Well, they're all pretty good.  But there's this running back from Kansas named Gale Sayers who's head and shoulders above everyone else."

[lex24]

Great story. Sayers was unreal. Unfortunately he got that knee injury against the Niners. Never was the same.

A line from "Brian's Song" has stuck with me over the years.  Brian Piccolo is talking with Gale Sayers and says, "I know I can't get a sixty yard run, but I can get six yards ten times, and they still add up the same way."

Our defense isn't very deep.  The longer our defense is on the field, the worse it is for us.  I wonder how we'll do, once we're past the Bryce Love era, but still have running backs averaging 4.5 yards or better, chewing up the clock?

BTW, speaking of Gale Sayers...my dad was a WR and best friends with Bob Berry, the QB at Willow Glen HS when they won 44 games in a row (and were finally beaten by a Bill Walsh coached team).  Bob was an All-American at Oregon and went on to a lengthy career with the Vikings and Falcons.  In those pre-media days, there was very little information on the athletes, and Bob had just been named to the West team for the 1965 East-West shrine game.  Butkus and Staubach were on the East team and Berry, Craig Morton of C.al, and Bob Nichols, Richard Ragsdale and Jack Chapple of Stanford were on the West team.  Dad and Berry and some of their former HS teammates were sitting around a kitchen table and talking about the all-stars and who really stood out.  My dad asked Berry who the best players were, and Bob said "Well, they're all pretty good.  But there's this running back from Kansas named Gale Sayers who's head and shoulders above everyone else."

[lex24]

Great story. Sayers was unreal. Unfortunately he got that knee injury against the Niners. Never was the same.

A line from "Brian's Song" has stuck with me over the years.  Brian Piccolo is talking with Gale Sayers and says, "I know I can't get a sixty yard run, but I can get six yards ten times, and they still add up the same way."

Our defense isn't very deep.  The longer our defense is on the field, the worse it is for us.  I wonder how we'll do, once we're past the Bryce Love era, but still have running backs averaging 4.5 yards or better, chewing up the clock?

BTW, speaking of Gale Sayers...my dad was a WR and best friends with Bob Berry, the QB at Willow Glen HS when they won 44 games in a row (and were finally beaten by a Bill Walsh coached team).  Bob was an All-American at Oregon and went on to a lengthy career with the Vikings and Falcons.  In those pre-media days, there was very little information on the athletes, and Bob had just been named to the West team for the 1965 East-West shrine game.  Butkus and Staubach were on the East team and Berry, Craig Morton of C.al, and Bob Nichols, Richard Ragsdale and Jack Chapple of Stanford were on the West team.  Dad and Berry and some of their former HS teammates were sitting around a kitchen table and talking about the all-stars and who really stood out.  My dad asked Berry who the best players were, and Bob said "Well, they're all pretty good.  But there's this running back from Kansas named Gale Sayers who's head and shoulders above everyone else."

[lex24]

Great story. Sayers was unreal. Unfortunately he got that knee injury against the Niners. Never was the same.

A line from "Brian's Song" has stuck with me over the years.  Brian Piccolo is talking with Gale Sayers and says, "I know I can't get a sixty yard run, but I can get six yards ten times, and they still add up the same way."

Our defense isn't very deep.  The longer our defense is on the field, the worse it is for us.  I wonder how we'll do, once we're past the Bryce Love era, but still have running backs averaging 4.5 yards or better, chewing up the clock?

BTW, speaking of Gale Sayers...my dad was a WR and best friends with Bob Berry, the QB at Willow Glen HS when they won 44 games in a row (and were finally beaten by a Bill Walsh coached team).  Bob was an All-American at Oregon and went on to a lengthy career with the Vikings and Falcons.  In those pre-media days, there was very little information on the athletes, and Bob had just been named to the West team for the 1965 East-West shrine game.  Butkus and Staubach were on the East team and Berry, Craig Morton of C.al, and Bob Nichols, Richard Ragsdale and Jack Chapple of Stanford were on the West team.  Dad and Berry and some of their former HS teammates were sitting around a kitchen table and talking about the all-stars and who really stood out.  My dad asked Berry who the best players were, and Bob said "Well, they're all pretty good.  But there's this running back from Kansas named Gale Sayers who's head and shoulders above everyone else."

[jacketree]

The speed differential on defense was stark.  What the heck happened?  You saw Patterson firing them up before going in at halftime.  Basically 'you are faster than them - get it together.'  Once Hill stopped making stupid throws and they stopped going north-south, they couldn't be stopped.  Turns out Stanford "only" needed 40 to win and they almost got there.

With a defense like that, there is no margin for error and the offense made too many mistakes to get to 40.

Think you are right that Stanford relied way too much on 'Bryce will break it' or 'JJ will make an impossible catch' and both things happened last night.  But
the hit or miss doesn't get a massive TOP advantage. They had a decent TOP advantage last night, with much of that built from just running clock at the LOS. Hopefully they can pare down the playbook, but make the offense more truly balanced (not just run/pass ratio) next year. TCU really had an offensive rhythm; Stanford had none.  They need to get a rhythm back and that rhythm can be Power. 

Still holding out hope that the defense can be much improved too.

A number of frustrating plays last night, that in isolation or taken together, would have made a big difference.

Dropped interception: -3 points
Outkicking the punt coverage: -7 points (unless that's the one where they missed the PAT)
Costello's locked eyes: -4 points

[jacketree]

The speed differential on defense was stark.  What the heck happened?  You saw Patterson firing them up before going in at halftime.  Basically 'you are faster than them - get it together.'  Once Hill stopped making stupid throws and they stopped going north-south, they couldn't be stopped.  Turns out Stanford "only" needed 40 to win and they almost got there.

With a defense like that, there is no margin for error and the offense made too many mistakes to get to 40.

Think you are right that Stanford relied way too much on 'Bryce will break it' or 'JJ will make an impossible catch' and both things happened last night.  But
the hit or miss doesn't get a massive TOP advantage. They had a decent TOP advantage last night, with much of that built from just running clock at the LOS. Hopefully they can pare down the playbook, but make the offense more truly balanced (not just run/pass ratio) next year. TCU really had an offensive rhythm; Stanford had none.  They need to get a rhythm back and that rhythm can be Power. 

Still holding out hope that the defense can be much improved too.

A number of frustrating plays last night, that in isolation or taken together, would have made a big difference.

Dropped interception: -3 points
Outkicking the punt coverage: -7 points (unless that's the one where they missed the PAT)
Costello's locked eyes: -4 points

[jacketree]

The speed differential on defense was stark.  What the heck happened?  You saw Patterson firing them up before going in at halftime.  Basically 'you are faster than them - get it together.'  Once Hill stopped making stupid throws and they stopped going north-south, they couldn't be stopped.  Turns out Stanford "only" needed 40 to win and they almost got there.

With a defense like that, there is no margin for error and the offense made too many mistakes to get to 40.

Think you are right that Stanford relied way too much on 'Bryce will break it' or 'JJ will make an impossible catch' and both things happened last night.  But
the hit or miss doesn't get a massive TOP advantage. They had a decent TOP advantage last night, with much of that built from just running clock at the LOS. Hopefully they can pare down the playbook, but make the offense more truly balanced (not just run/pass ratio) next year. TCU really had an offensive rhythm; Stanford had none.  They need to get a rhythm back and that rhythm can be Power. 

Still holding out hope that the defense can be much improved too.

A number of frustrating plays last night, that in isolation or taken together, would have made a big difference.

Dropped interception: -3 points
Outkicking the punt coverage: -7 points (unless that's the one where they missed the PAT)
Costello's locked eyes: -4 points

[jacketree]

The speed differential on defense was stark.  What the heck happened?  You saw Patterson firing them up before going in at halftime.  Basically 'you are faster than them - get it together.'  Once Hill stopped making stupid throws and they stopped going north-south, they couldn't be stopped.  Turns out Stanford "only" needed 40 to win and they almost got there.

With a defense like that, there is no margin for error and the offense made too many mistakes to get to 40.

Think you are right that Stanford relied way too much on 'Bryce will break it' or 'JJ will make an impossible catch' and both things happened last night.  But
the hit or miss doesn't get a massive TOP advantage. They had a decent TOP advantage last night, with much of that built from just running clock at the LOS. Hopefully they can pare down the playbook, but make the offense more truly balanced (not just run/pass ratio) next year. TCU really had an offensive rhythm; Stanford had none.  They need to get a rhythm back and that rhythm can be Power. 

Still holding out hope that the defense can be much improved too.

A number of frustrating plays last night, that in isolation or taken together, would have made a big difference.

Dropped interception: -3 points
Outkicking the punt coverage: -7 points (unless that's the one where they missed the PAT)
Costello's locked eyes: -4 points

[stupac2]

The speed differential on defense was stark.  What the heck happened?  You saw Patterson firing them up before going in at halftime.  Basically 'you are faster than them - get it together.'  Once Hill stopped making stupid throws and they stopped going north-south, they couldn't be stopped.  Turns out Stanford "only" needed 40 to win and they almost got there.

With a defense like that, there is no margin for error and the offense made too many mistakes to get to 40.

Think you are right that Stanford relied way too much on 'Bryce will break it' or 'JJ will make an impossible catch' and both things happened last night.  But
the hit or miss doesn't get a massive TOP advantage. They had a decent TOP advantage last night, with much of that built from just running clock at the LOS. Hopefully they can pare down the playbook, but make the offense more truly balanced (not just run/pass ratio) next year. TCU really had an offensive rhythm; Stanford had none.  They need to get a rhythm back and that rhythm can be Power. 

Still holding out hope that the defense can be much improved too.

A number of frustrating plays last night, that in isolation or taken together, would have made a big difference.

Dropped interception: -3 points
Outkicking the punt coverage: -7 points (unless that's the one where they missed the PAT)
Costello's locked eyes: -4 points

Costello's interception in the end zone was also likely -3 points. Then again I don't think I'd count the punt TD as -7, did we make TCU punt in the fourth quarter? Best-case outcome there was probably a FG.

[stupac2]

The speed differential on defense was stark.  What the heck happened?  You saw Patterson firing them up before going in at halftime.  Basically 'you are faster than them - get it together.'  Once Hill stopped making stupid throws and they stopped going north-south, they couldn't be stopped.  Turns out Stanford "only" needed 40 to win and they almost got there.

With a defense like that, there is no margin for error and the offense made too many mistakes to get to 40.

Think you are right that Stanford relied way too much on 'Bryce will break it' or 'JJ will make an impossible catch' and both things happened last night.  But
the hit or miss doesn't get a massive TOP advantage. They had a decent TOP advantage last night, with much of that built from just running clock at the LOS. Hopefully they can pare down the playbook, but make the offense more truly balanced (not just run/pass ratio) next year. TCU really had an offensive rhythm; Stanford had none.  They need to get a rhythm back and that rhythm can be Power. 

Still holding out hope that the defense can be much improved too.

A number of frustrating plays last night, that in isolation or taken together, would have made a big difference.

Dropped interception: -3 points
Outkicking the punt coverage: -7 points (unless that's the one where they missed the PAT)
Costello's locked eyes: -4 points

Costello's interception in the end zone was also likely -3 points. Then again I don't think I'd count the punt TD as -7, did we make TCU punt in the fourth quarter? Best-case outcome there was probably a FG.

[stupac2]

The speed differential on defense was stark.  What the heck happened?  You saw Patterson firing them up before going in at halftime.  Basically 'you are faster than them - get it together.'  Once Hill stopped making stupid throws and they stopped going north-south, they couldn't be stopped.  Turns out Stanford "only" needed 40 to win and they almost got there.

With a defense like that, there is no margin for error and the offense made too many mistakes to get to 40.

Think you are right that Stanford relied way too much on 'Bryce will break it' or 'JJ will make an impossible catch' and both things happened last night.  But
the hit or miss doesn't get a massive TOP advantage. They had a decent TOP advantage last night, with much of that built from just running clock at the LOS. Hopefully they can pare down the playbook, but make the offense more truly balanced (not just run/pass ratio) next year. TCU really had an offensive rhythm; Stanford had none.  They need to get a rhythm back and that rhythm can be Power. 

Still holding out hope that the defense can be much improved too.

A number of frustrating plays last night, that in isolation or taken together, would have made a big difference.

Dropped interception: -3 points
Outkicking the punt coverage: -7 points (unless that's the one where they missed the PAT)
Costello's locked eyes: -4 points

Costello's interception in the end zone was also likely -3 points. Then again I don't think I'd count the punt TD as -7, did we make TCU punt in the fourth quarter? Best-case outcome there was probably a FG.

[stupac2]

The speed differential on defense was stark.  What the heck happened?  You saw Patterson firing them up before going in at halftime.  Basically 'you are faster than them - get it together.'  Once Hill stopped making stupid throws and they stopped going north-south, they couldn't be stopped.  Turns out Stanford "only" needed 40 to win and they almost got there.

With a defense like that, there is no margin for error and the offense made too many mistakes to get to 40.

Think you are right that Stanford relied way too much on 'Bryce will break it' or 'JJ will make an impossible catch' and both things happened last night.  But
the hit or miss doesn't get a massive TOP advantage. They had a decent TOP advantage last night, with much of that built from just running clock at the LOS. Hopefully they can pare down the playbook, but make the offense more truly balanced (not just run/pass ratio) next year. TCU really had an offensive rhythm; Stanford had none.  They need to get a rhythm back and that rhythm can be Power. 

Still holding out hope that the defense can be much improved too.

A number of frustrating plays last night, that in isolation or taken together, would have made a big difference.

Dropped interception: -3 points
Outkicking the punt coverage: -7 points (unless that's the one where they missed the PAT)
Costello's locked eyes: -4 points

Costello's interception in the end zone was also likely -3 points. Then again I don't think I'd count the punt TD as -7, did we make TCU punt in the fourth quarter? Best-case outcome there was probably a FG.

[Trevmiesterj]

Costello's locked eyes: -4 points

I just watched the replay of the game currently airing on ESPN; I came in near the end of the third where a nice drive culminated in a Toner field goal.  That drive with the nice opening run by Love, the pass to Scarlett was a heckuva chance to flip the game.

However that image of Parkinson uncovered and wide open in the end zone will be a painful film watch for Costello.  Might have been the game right there.

[Trevmiesterj]

Costello's locked eyes: -4 points

I just watched the replay of the game currently airing on ESPN; I came in near the end of the third where a nice drive culminated in a Toner field goal.  That drive with the nice opening run by Love, the pass to Scarlett was a heckuva chance to flip the game.

However that image of Parkinson uncovered and wide open in the end zone will be a painful film watch for Costello.  Might have been the game right there.

[Trevmiesterj]

Costello's locked eyes: -4 points

I just watched the replay of the game currently airing on ESPN; I came in near the end of the third where a nice drive culminated in a Toner field goal.  That drive with the nice opening run by Love, the pass to Scarlett was a heckuva chance to flip the game.

However that image of Parkinson uncovered and wide open in the end zone will be a painful film watch for Costello.  Might have been the game right there.

[Trevmiesterj]

Costello's locked eyes: -4 points

I just watched the replay of the game currently airing on ESPN; I came in near the end of the third where a nice drive culminated in a Toner field goal.  That drive with the nice opening run by Love, the pass to Scarlett was a heckuva chance to flip the game.

However that image of Parkinson uncovered and wide open in the end zone will be a painful film watch for Costello.  Might have been the game right there.

[Goose]

However that image of Parkinson uncovered and wide open in the end zone will be a painful film watch for Costello.  Might have been the game right there.

That was certainly an example of Costello staring down the receiver. He never even looked to the left or right. This is not unusual for a college QB, and to be fair, it has worked in the past for him on exactly that pattern. Despite the double coverage, they almost pulled it off. Good lesson can be learned from it going forward.

[Goose]

However that image of Parkinson uncovered and wide open in the end zone will be a painful film watch for Costello.  Might have been the game right there.

That was certainly an example of Costello staring down the receiver. He never even looked to the left or right. This is not unusual for a college QB, and to be fair, it has worked in the past for him on exactly that pattern. Despite the double coverage, they almost pulled it off. Good lesson can be learned from it going forward.

[Goose]

However that image of Parkinson uncovered and wide open in the end zone will be a painful film watch for Costello.  Might have been the game right there.

That was certainly an example of Costello staring down the receiver. He never even looked to the left or right. This is not unusual for a college QB, and to be fair, it has worked in the past for him on exactly that pattern. Despite the double coverage, they almost pulled it off. Good lesson can be learned from it going forward.

[Goose]

However that image of Parkinson uncovered and wide open in the end zone will be a painful film watch for Costello.  Might have been the game right there.

That was certainly an example of Costello staring down the receiver. He never even looked to the left or right. This is not unusual for a college QB, and to be fair, it has worked in the past for him on exactly that pattern. Despite the double coverage, they almost pulled it off. Good lesson can be learned from it going forward.

[BigEasyCard]

....

This was, to me, the most frustrating year of the Shaw era. They have been pretty darn good at winning the tight games. Not this year  Still 9-5.  Good year. Just so close to being a great one.

Agreed.  We lost four games by a total of eleven points. 

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

....

This was, to me, the most frustrating year of the Shaw era. They have been pretty darn good at winning the tight games. Not this year  Still 9-5.  Good year. Just so close to being a great one.

Agreed.  We lost four games by a total of eleven points. 

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

....

This was, to me, the most frustrating year of the Shaw era. They have been pretty darn good at winning the tight games. Not this year  Still 9-5.  Good year. Just so close to being a great one.

Agreed.  We lost four games by a total of eleven points. 

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

....

This was, to me, the most frustrating year of the Shaw era. They have been pretty darn good at winning the tight games. Not this year  Still 9-5.  Good year. Just so close to being a great one.

Agreed.  We lost four games by a total of eleven points. 

Geaux Cardinal!

[Langdude]

We did possess the ball more than TCU.

-m.

[Langdude]

We did possess the ball more than TCU.

-m.

[Langdude]

We did possess the ball more than TCU.

-m.

[Langdude]

We did possess the ball more than TCU.

-m.

[cardcrimson]

We did possess the ball more than TCU.

-m.

By over six minutes. Guess that facts get in the way of some of the above arguments. Good catch Langdude.

Stanford won the turnover battle, as well. 3-2.

[cardcrimson]

We did possess the ball more than TCU.

-m.

By over six minutes. Guess that facts get in the way of some of the above arguments. Good catch Langdude.

Stanford won the turnover battle, as well. 3-2.

[cardcrimson]

We did possess the ball more than TCU.

-m.

By over six minutes. Guess that facts get in the way of some of the above arguments. Good catch Langdude.

Stanford won the turnover battle, as well. 3-2.

[cardcrimson]

We did possess the ball more than TCU.

-m.

By over six minutes. Guess that facts get in the way of some of the above arguments. Good catch Langdude.

Stanford won the turnover battle, as well. 3-2.