[76lsjumb]

1.  Nunes was not good, or even "fine."  The YPA stat was awful, he threw too many bad balls (even the bomb to Montgomery was underthrown, though Ty should have hauled it in), and he didn't ever look to even threaten to tuck and run.  At best, I would say Nunes was "okay," but only because I think the "dink and dunk" play calling was crappy.

2.  The defense was good to very good.  I don't get why people are bitching about a team that held SJSU to under 300 yards and 17 points, AND they came up h-u-g-e in Q4 when I, for one, was certain that SJSU would score the go-ahead points and leave Stanford Stadium with a W.  And if you factor in the fact that this defense was on the field WAY MORE than Cardinal defenses of the last few seasons, and I think it is very easy to give this unit an A- (B+ at worst). 

Re: No. 1 -- My, how times change.  What you now deride as "crappy" "'dink and dunk'" play-calling -- by which I assume you mean short, quick passes that Nunes generally managed to excute reasonably well [2 bat downs notwithstanding] -- used to known as the product of a genius -- i.e., Bill Walsh's West Coast offense.

Re: No. 2 -- At the end of the game, the defense only came up h-u-g-e because the SJS receivers dropped several very catchable passes, no particular thanks to our secondary. 

It seemes to me that the most obvious difference on offense between last year [and the year before, for that matter] and Friday night was that the short yardage, power run game was nowhere near as effective...and it seems unfair to me to blame that deficiency on Nunes.

[76lsjumb]

1.  Nunes was not good, or even "fine."  The YPA stat was awful, he threw too many bad balls (even the bomb to Montgomery was underthrown, though Ty should have hauled it in), and he didn't ever look to even threaten to tuck and run.  At best, I would say Nunes was "okay," but only because I think the "dink and dunk" play calling was crappy.

2.  The defense was good to very good.  I don't get why people are bitching about a team that held SJSU to under 300 yards and 17 points, AND they came up h-u-g-e in Q4 when I, for one, was certain that SJSU would score the go-ahead points and leave Stanford Stadium with a W.  And if you factor in the fact that this defense was on the field WAY MORE than Cardinal defenses of the last few seasons, and I think it is very easy to give this unit an A- (B+ at worst). 

Re: No. 1 -- My, how times change.  What you now deride as "crappy" "'dink and dunk'" play-calling -- by which I assume you mean short, quick passes that Nunes generally managed to excute reasonably well [2 bat downs notwithstanding] -- used to known as the product of a genius -- i.e., Bill Walsh's West Coast offense.

Re: No. 2 -- At the end of the game, the defense only came up h-u-g-e because the SJS receivers dropped several very catchable passes, no particular thanks to our secondary. 

It seemes to me that the most obvious difference on offense between last year [and the year before, for that matter] and Friday night was that the short yardage, power run game was nowhere near as effective...and it seems unfair to me to blame that deficiency on Nunes.

[StannyBoy]

I'm not too worried about the o-line once we get Peat back at LT and Yankey can stay at LG. And with Garnett creeping up on Danser at RG we'll know pretty early in the season just how good Nunes is.

[StannyBoy]

I'm not too worried about the o-line once we get Peat back at LT and Yankey can stay at LG. And with Garnett creeping up on Danser at RG we'll know pretty early in the season just how good Nunes is.

[terry]

In SJS's last 5 possessions, they got just 1 first down. In those possessions, only 5 of SJS's 17 plays gained positive yardage (and one of those 5 plays resulted in a turnover). Those 17 plays combined gained a total of just 11 yards (not counting another 10 yards that were credited to the SJS offense because an SJS fumble rolled 10 yards downfield before Stanford recovered). That is good defense.

[terry]

In SJS's last 5 possessions, they got just 1 first down. In those possessions, only 5 of SJS's 17 plays gained positive yardage (and one of those 5 plays resulted in a turnover). Those 17 plays combined gained a total of just 11 yards (not counting another 10 yards that were credited to the SJS offense because an SJS fumble rolled 10 yards downfield before Stanford recovered). That is good defense.

[washingtonismoney]

When I call Nunes "fine," I mean "fine" in the context of what he was asked to do. The hangup here is downfield passing: if he can't do it, then he's not fine--and serious questions should be asked of Shaw/Hamilton. You can't win games consistently with a 4.8 YPA.

(Some have made comparisons to Walsh's west coast offense. This is a highly faulty comparison. The genius of Walsh's offense was that it kept YPA at a constant--or increased it--while increasing efficiency. Nunes' low YPA does not fit into the same paradigm. I'm willing to give this game a pass, but it should very much be the exception at the end of the season.)

[washingtonismoney]

When I call Nunes "fine," I mean "fine" in the context of what he was asked to do. The hangup here is downfield passing: if he can't do it, then he's not fine--and serious questions should be asked of Shaw/Hamilton. You can't win games consistently with a 4.8 YPA.

(Some have made comparisons to Walsh's west coast offense. This is a highly faulty comparison. The genius of Walsh's offense was that it kept YPA at a constant--or increased it--while increasing efficiency. Nunes' low YPA does not fit into the same paradigm. I'm willing to give this game a pass, but it should very much be the exception at the end of the season.)