The CardBoard
Notes from the game - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Notes from the game (/thread-12665.html)

Pages: 1 2

Notes from the game - BostonCard - 09-18-2016

Beating USC never gets old.  That is the third double-digit win against Trojans in the last 12 months.  Makes me wish we played them more often.

The day started with my son and I eating sliders at the Slider Bar on University.  It was better than Umami Burger a block away.  Not phenomenal, but they were good.

We then went to go see the Anderson Collection next to the Museum (https://anderson.stanford.edu/).  How many places can you see world class modern art on the same afternoon as world class football?  If you haven't been, I highly recommend it.  It is very manageable, and you can see the entire collection in an hour.  Admission is free, and the building is lovely.  Plus it has a very laid back vibe that you don't get in most museums.

After tailgating and practicing pass patterns in the afternoon, we arrived at the stadium about 10 min PTK.  The lines were longer than they were against KSU, and gate 2 was no longer a quick entry.  So we went around to gate 4, where the line was fairly short.  We got in within 5 minutes, and got to see the end of the LSJUMB pre-game show.  As I mentioned in the live thread, the theme of the show was "Make LSJUMB Great Again", which I thought was fairly clever.

The game itself seemed to drag a bit.  You look at the score, and you think it was an easy win.  And, in many ways, it was.  We never trailed; we were up two TD's by halftime (ESPN's win probability meter pegged us at 91% at halftime) and three scores by the start of the fourth quarter (win probability 96%).  It was a methodical beat down... and yet, it seemed like we were struggling.  Early on, USC was ripping 5, 6, 9 yard runs through our defense.  And it looked like we were struggling to establish any sort of rhythm on offense.  We had two big plays (the 56 yard pass to McCaffrey and the 56 yard end-around by Rector), and not a ton else.  Only one other drive scored a TD, and it too had a big play (a big run against a stacked box by McCaffrey, who after busting through the line basically had a bunch of daylight in front of him).  But that's a lot more than you can say about USC, who really struggled on third down, probably reflecting their piss poor passing game.  I don't think USC is really built to come back, and it showed.  As others noted, we seem to have gotten better up front as the game wore on, and USC tired out.  When USC failed to convert a 4th and 2 at our 18 yard line early in the fourth quarter, it was all over.  When Ryan Burns threw his punterception, USC had 11 minutes to come back three scores.  They punted 6 plays later and it was all over.  The next time they touched the ball, there were 4 minutes left.

A few odds and ends...
* Attendance was pretty good at kickoff.  Not full, but full enough.
* That being said, it was not especially loud, except at some key third downs.
* Wish we could claim credit for the false starts, but most of them seemed to come on first down, when it was actually kind of quiet.
* Weather was beautiful as usual.  A tad warm at kickoff as we got the strong afternoon sun, but it cooled off quickly once the sun went down.
* We ran student body left... student body right, and I just busted out laughing.  As I recall, we were reasonably successful, at least the first time.
* Shaw is really, really good at setting up for trick plays.  According to him on post-game, we kept on running power/counter/power/power until USC started crashing its weak-side linebackers.  Once they did, BLAM, an end-around to the spot vacated by Porter Gustin and 56 yards later, it's a TD.
* Ditto with McCaffrey's touchdown.  I wondered aloud why he was so open, but if you look closely, he should have been covered by a safety (Tell) on the wheel route.  But Tell bit on the fake to Love (this is why having Love back was such a key), and McCaffrey blew by him.
* I always have mixed feelings about lining up behind the jumbo formation as an every down play.  Yeah, I love getting 6, 7, 8 yards even when the opponent knows what we are going to run, but I at least want to keep the theoretical option of play-faking it, which is hard to do when you have no wide receivers on the field (though of course, we could play fake to a running back or tight end, as we did last year against Colorado).
* LSJUMB's halftime show was another stab at the Trojan marching band.  I almost feel sorry for them, because the very quality that LSJUMB makes fun of them for (their uptightness) makes it impossible for them to retort.
* Speaking of the Trojan band.  Thank you for ruining another perfectly good song (David Guetta and Sia's Bang My Head).  Who thought it was a good idea to make a "tribute to EDM"?  By the end, I wanted to bang my head.  Maybe they were trying to prove to LSJUMB that they really can play more than two songs (one of the jokes in the LSJUMB halftime show).
* Speaking of "two songs", on my way back to the car, I was humming Conquest (or maybe it was Tribute to Troy, I can never remember), and as I caught myself doing it, I smiled.  Goes to show how far we've come, because I have now developed positive associations with USC's songs.
* I wish that the stadium would upgrade its wifi.  I realize that it is tough to accomodate 50,000 people with smartphones on the system, but it is Stanford, they should find a way.
* Anyway, lovely Saturday afternoon/evening.  I hope everyone else did too.

BC

Re: Notes from the game - French Rage - 09-18-2016

How many plays did we have both Love and CMac in?  Both are great on their own, don't get me wrong, but I think the real power comes from having both of them in, and the opponents not knowing who gets the ball?  Watching live I couldn't keep exact track of it, but it seemed like it was much more the exception than the rule.

Re: Notes from the game - stupac2 - 09-18-2016

(09-18-2016, 07:27 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:* Speaking of "two songs", on my way back to the car, I was humming Conquest (or maybe it was Tribute to Troy, I can never remember), and as I caught myself doing it, I smiled.  Goes to show how far we've come, because I have now developed positive associations with USC's songs.

I was doing this too, though I think it's mostly the sheer repetition and shortness. I've also been randomly humming Itsy Bitsy Spider because it's the first song in the loop on my kid's new bouncer.

Re: Notes from the game - BostonCard - 09-18-2016

Some key defensive plays.  I'd forgotten about Solomon Thomas in the backfield.  That was big.

https://twitter.com/stanfordfball/status/777664353029853184

BC

Re: Notes from the game - BostonCard - 09-18-2016

And here is the gostanford notes:

http://www.gostanford.com/news/2016/9/18/football-sundays-with-soltau.aspx

BC

Re: Notes from the game - BostonCard - 09-18-2016

I liked this stat (h/t to Ted Miller):

https://twitter.com/tedmillerrk/status/777562510891167744

That defender with 7/10 of his body in the box really didn't add much.

BC

Re: Notes from the game - fullmetal - 09-19-2016

Maybe U$C and KSU are better quality opponents than I realize, but I also agree that the offense seems stuck in first gear until a trick play.  I feel like Shaw should still remember those play action TE passes of the Fleener/Ertz days, and I wonder why we're not passing out of the power I yet.  (Trick question: the answer is that we don't have to.  Student body every which way still works, and that's all we need to do to run down the clock and win the game.)

I'm still looking for the basic strongside toss play to McCaffrey, which ought to spring him in a bit of space.  Maybe the WR blocking needs to improve.

Methodical Shaw frustrates fans, but Methodical Shaw is playing for the whole season and certainly not for style points.

Re: Notes from the game - Mick - 09-19-2016

(09-19-2016, 01:37 AM)fullmetal link Wrote:Maybe U$C and KSU are better quality opponents than I realize, but I also agree that the offense seems stuck in first gear until a trick play.  I feel like Shaw should still remember those play action TE passes of the Fleener/Ertz days, and I wonder why we're not passing out of the power I yet.  (Trick question: the answer is that we don't have to.  Student body every which way still works, and that's all we need to do to run down the clock and win the game.)

I'm still looking for the basic strongside toss play to McCaffrey, which ought to spring him in a bit of space.  Maybe the WR blocking needs to improve.

Methodical Shaw frustrates fans, but Methodical Shaw is playing for the whole season and certainly not for style points.

I like Methodical Shaw.  It seems to me that we'll score 28 but if the other team scores 10 or 13 and we can limit our own number of plays drastically, it makes sense to not wear out player bodies.

Re: Notes from the game - slide - 09-19-2016

picking up on BC's bands comments, nice quote from Bruce Jenkins:

"So how about that battle of the bands? Stanford's, in a runaway. The USC contingent, after boring everyone to exasperation with its endless repetition of an old theme (I believe it's called "The Monotony of Tedium"), sought any brand of solace on its way toward the exits, chanting "Beat the Utes."

Re: Notes from the game - winflop - 09-19-2016

(09-18-2016, 07:36 PM)French Rage link Wrote:How many plays did we have both Love and CMac in?  Both are great on their own, don't get me wrong, but I think the real power comes from having both of them in, and the opponents not knowing who gets the ball?  Watching live I couldn't keep exact track of it, but it seemed like it was much more the exception than the rule.

I'd guess around a half-dozen but I'm pretty sure the first one resulted in the TD throw to McCaffrey.  I'd love to see it run about a dozen times.  Fake inside handoff to McCaffrey, fake pitch to Love.  Somebody is going to be wide open downfield (TEs in the seam or one of the outside receivers).  Just a matter if the OL can give Burns enough time, and if Burns can make the connection.  This can be a devastating formation.

Re: Notes from the game - stupac2 - 09-19-2016

(09-19-2016, 03:09 AM)Mick link Wrote:I like Methodical Shaw.  It seems to me that we'll score 28 but if the other team scores 10 or 13 and we can limit our own number of plays drastically, it makes sense to not wear out player bodies.

Exactly!

I don't understand how anyone could be frustrated by that game. Sure, we didn't put up 50 points, but we scored on 5/8 meaningful possessions! We got over 3.3 points per drive! That's really good! And holding the other team to only 10 points on 9 drives is amazing! That game was great!

Seriously, what is there to complain about? That we had to punt twice? That we only had one red-zone TD because our plays are too explosive? I don't get it, that game was fantastic.

Re: Notes from the game - BostonCard - 09-19-2016

Nope, not complaining.  I would certainly prefer a game where the offense "feels" a bit out-of-sync but that is pretty much over at the start of the fourth quarter than, say, the Cal - Texas game, which featured plenty of exciting offense, but where the outcome was in doubt until about 2 min left when Texas punted and Cal was able to run out the clock with one first down.

I would be perfectly happy with the type of setup we had in 2013, where we had a world class defense coupled with a good but not spectacular offense.  The only thing that I am really left to complain about is that we don't know how this team will react if we are behind in the fourth quarter.  Is Burns capable of leading a comeback if we need it?  Can he hit receivers when we are mostly throwing and the defense doesn't show 8 in the box?  I hope not to have to find out, but inevitably there will be a case where we won't have a 2-score lead at halftime.

BC

Re: Notes from the game - Hulk01 - 09-19-2016

It's close to a formula for college football.

If your running backs can average over five yards per carry, keep running.  You'll churn out first downs and take the legs out of the opposition's front seven.  And it's an axiom, too, that once their legs go out, they don't come back.

Mac and Love combined for 5.3 yards per carry.  And to try for the death blow, we ran seven consecutive times on our first drive of the seocnd half, and then our next two plays of the next.  Nine runs for 119 yards, two passes for -1 yard, ten points, 27-10:  Game all but over if you can run because the opponent is going to run out of possessions as long as you can run and work the clock.

Bloomgren knew--his offensive line guys almost certainly told him--that they could take over SC's front seven.  And we knew that was likely gping in because they were so depleted one their DL going in. 

We did this last year, but perhaps it seems less obvious  Mac averaged six yard per carry, Sanders 6.2, Love 7.8.  So we simply kept running,a 64%-36% split, similar to what we saw in 2013 with Gaffney. 

I also think fans view as tricky--deceptive and hard to defend--reverses, fake fumble/throw, and other "off" plays--when what is tricky to defend is an offense that throws a lot of looks and personnel groupings that force you to account for the group and the formation and what the hell you have to, as a defender, to defend:  Where do I align, what's my assignment?  Hell!! 

Stanford's offense is remarkably unusual this way--positively eccentric.  And it forces 20 year old guys defending, some with very little or no experience, to think.  And once you have to think first, you've lost a step. 

And if that offense has been grinding at you for over a half, you've lost yet another step and, it often happens, some of your heart too.



Re: Notes from the game - CTcard - 09-19-2016

(09-19-2016, 09:46 AM)Hulk01 link Wrote:It's close to a formula for college football.

If your running backs can average over five yards per carry, keep running.  You'll churn out first downs and take the legs out of the opposition's front seven.  And it's an axiom, too, that once their legs go out, they don't come back.

Mac and Love combined for 5.3 yards per carry.

Of course U$C's running backs, Jones and Davis, combined for 5.4 yards per carry. And they were doing much better initially than our guys.
Fortunately for us, by either choice or force of circumstances, $C decided to run only 25 times to our 47.

Re: Notes from the game - Red State - 09-19-2016

If a team can average 3.5 ypc on M-A-N-Y carries and avoid turnovers, they will be almost impossible to beat. Rushing attempts are more important than ypc. Saturday was just another example.

Re: Notes from the game - stupac2 - 09-19-2016

How much of USC's problems running were the penalties? 5.4 ypc looks great when you need to gain 10, but it's cutting it close when you need 15. It was also playing into our hands, since running takes more time off the clock which we wanted for most of the game. And once we got close to the end zone and didn't need to worry about them taking the top off we toughened up a lot, which I have to think was intentional, even if it would be nice to be Alabama and just sit in base and win every matchup.

Re: Notes from the game - 81alum - 09-19-2016

Anyone know what happened on the injury front?  Alijah Holder went into a tent at one point, didn't he?  Anyone else hurt?  Any news on Holder?

Re: Notes from the game - CowboyIndian - 09-19-2016

(09-18-2016, 07:36 PM)French Rage link Wrote:How many plays did we have both Love and CMac in?  Both are great on their own, don't get me wrong, but I think the real power comes from having both of them in, and the opponents not knowing who gets the ball?  Watching live I couldn't keep exact track of it, but it seemed like it was much more the exception than the rule.

We are still protecting Burns to a great degree. With Mac and Love in there together we are giving up some pass pro. Also....Love was coming off an injury and I think we'll see him more involved over the coming weeks.

And....we didn't really need to show much more than we did, now, did we?

Re: Notes from the game - Mick - 09-19-2016

(09-19-2016, 10:33 AM)CowboyIndian link Wrote:[quote author=French Rage link=topic=15705.msg171819#msg171819 date=1474252589]
How many plays did we have both Love and CMac in?  Both are great on their own, don't get me wrong, but I think the real power comes from having both of them in, and the opponents not knowing who gets the ball?  Watching live I couldn't keep exact track of it, but it seemed like it was much more the exception than the rule.

We are still protecting Burns to a great degree. With Mac and Love in there together we are giving up some pass pro. Also....Love was coming off an injury and I think we'll see him more involved over the coming weeks.

And....we didn't really need to show much more than we did, now, did we?
[/quote]


Just show enough to win, Uncle Milty...

Re: Notes from the game - terry - 09-19-2016

My, how times have changed. We just beat U*S*C by 17 points, which is Stanford's largest-ever margin of victory at home against U*S*C. And people are talking about it as though it were a routine win. I love the new normal. . . .