Sunday morning thoughts - Washington

Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - 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: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington (/thread-23491.html)

Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - msqueri - 09-25-2022

1. This game felt like the quintessential Stanford game of the last four seasons. Beaten in the trenches. Much more laborious for us to move the ball or find the end zone than our opponents. A smattering of good things the fans can't even enjoy because it never feels like we might actually win. Diehards go to bed late because we've become so irrelevant we play after dark. Coach gives a sullen post-game press conference that lasts nine minutes because there are only three reporters in the room and then a few poor players are at a loss for words because they're trying their best and we just aren't a relevant, competitive program anymore. Joyless. This has been our norm for years now.

2. On a per play basis we were in the zip code (or at least the county) of competitive, gaining 6 yards per play (half a yard better than against USC and the most Washington has given up this season) and giving up 6.9 yards per play (just slightly worse than Michigan State and Kent State mustered) but that doesn't come close to telling the story as sacks and turnovers were by far the bigger factors. The passing attack worked when it could get a throw off - 11 yards per attempt and a 188.18 passer rating, both the most Washington has been beaten in the air in the last 24 games - but that's cold comfort in the face of 8 sacks. That's the most sacks Washington has had in 54 games and, for a Stanford fan, brings back unpleasant memories of the mid-2000s. It doesn't really matter if the QB can sling it if he can't get the ball out of his hands. We're now 129th in the country in sacks allowed, third to last. It's a combination of breakdowns in pass blocking and McKee's putrid pocket presence.

3. That lack of pocket presence factored into the other overriding story of the game, which was of course turnovers. With three more turnovers yesterday, McKee is averaging two a game. Like the running backs he shares the mesh with, McKee is a productive player who spoils it by not being able to take care of the ball. It's a microcosm of Stanford's inability to compete in the turnover margin, which by no means falls just on McKee or Smith or Filkins as the defense is equally culpable. Our failures are notable on historic timescales. We are dead last in the country in turnover margin, fumbles gained, and fumbles lost. Only four teams have fewer interceptions than us and only three teams have fewer turnovers lost. Our best turnover attribute is avoiding interceptions, which is all the way up at 86th. All of this adds up to only one team having fewer takeaways and three teams having fewer giveaways. That adds up to historic failure: our negative 3.33 turnover margin per game is more than double the margin of the teams at 125th and next worst in the nation is a 2.0 margin per game. Nothing really matters if you are this bad at protecting the ball AND this bad at seizing the ball.

4. We know the defense is bad and giving up more yards per play than awful defense Kent State did supports that, but a modest word in defense of the defense: they were trying and at times holding the line against a more talented and well-coached offense. The run defense was bad, no sugarcoating that (2.34 yards per carry more allowed than Michigan State, 1.4 more than Kent State), but Washington has a lethal passing game and last night, believe it or not, was the lowest yards per attempt, passer rating, total yards, touchdowns, and completion percentage the Huskies have mustered. We gave by far the best pass defense performance they've faced. It wasn't good as Kelly remains overrated and Turner-Muhammad, Bonner, and McGill all took turns getting roasted by Odunze, but this was a great passing attack we faced and we somewhat bounced back from the USC pass defense nightmare. This is not to suggest there's any real reason for optimism for the defense. Washington took what we gave them (prevent defense on 3rd and 1!), scored what Vegas thought they would, and could have scored much more. There's no reason anybody who's watched Anderson defenses the last half decade should think even mediocre defense can be in the cards for Stanford going forward. I just wanted to point out the players battled, although watching Mangum-Farrar's post-game availability raises the question for me how much more adversity the players will gamely battle as realization sets in that high effort still equals failure.

5. Having said modestly defensive words about the collective effort on defense, it can't escape mentioning that we have no dudes and make no plays. My wife commented from the couch and one of my astute friends observed via text message that the defensive players just look smaller, slower, and less impressive than they used to. Every game I count up the individual defensive plays that make a significant contribution (tackles for loss, pass breakups, run stops that help us on down and distance, etc.). Yesterday I didn't count a single defender with more than two such plays. Miezan (two tackles for loss, which now makes him tied for sixth in the Pac-12 with Gabe Reid), Williamson (two key third down plays, a tackle and a pass breakup, that forced punts), and Fields/DiCosmo/Armitage (two quality tackles each given down and distance) showed up to some degree. But nobody with 3+ impact plays? Yikes.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - msqueri - 09-25-2022

6. This week's moving the chains (first down) list: Filkins (7), Wilson (6), Higgins (2), Humphreys, Yurosek. Filkins' 100 yard rushing game is a nice accomplishment but he was responsible for a turnover, again, and like many was part of the pass blocking problem. A very EJ Smith-like game: nice production but too many losing plays. With those two being interchangeable in those respects, it's hard to say Smith's absence mattered. But Shaw wasn't wrong about the tackle absences (though Rouse eventually came back in) being deeply detrimental. Stanford fans a few months ago never would have believed it, but the Hinton injury loomed large. Nobody was good in pass blocking yesterday, but McLaughlin and Miller especially had a night to forget. The player of the game was Wilson with his monster 188 yards from scrimmage and two touchdowns. As I always say, dude is a pro and effort will never be an issue. As Jacob Rayburn said, we need 22 Michael Wilsons. For the moment, he's the per game yards from scrimmage leader among all Pac-12 receivers.

7. Alas, Wilson's contributions stand alone among all Stanford pass catchers. Our much-ballyhooed receiving weapons have been awful this year. Aside from Wilson, nobody else is even top 25 in the conference in receiving. According to PFF, through three games Yurosek, Higgins, and Tremayne are three of our four worst starters (Yurosek and Higgins the two worst). Brutal start to the year for these guys.

8. I had been interested in evaluating the continued evolution to the slow mesh RPO but did not find this game particularly insightful. Nobody has the identity they want with 8 sacks and multiple turnovers. What annoyed me was hearing announcers talking about the identity being more solidified later in the year, as if we didn't have all off-season and are in week four of the season. Also, talk of injuries as an excuse should reckon with Washington's defense having as much adversity on that front as our offense.

9. Special teams now seems like a definitive weakness for Stanford, at least compared to the Alamar norm. I hold my breath on all special teams plays other than punts, which seem solid (Sanborn had net punts of 38, 43, 50, and 41, with one downed at the 3). Kick returns are especially depressing. It's like we're giving yards away.

10. Game balls: Wilson, Miezan, Sanborn, Gould

11. I'm of two minds on the outlook going forward. In the focus-on-what's-ahead-of-you sense, we knew this would be a tough game and we'll be heading right back to the Pacific Northwest for an opportunity to shock the world with a road upset of a ranked team. If we can do that, a 2-2 start keeps alive hopes of a stabilizing mediocre season. A case can be made that the sacks and turnovers story of our season so far has been so extreme that a reversion to the mean (coupled perhaps with proven performers like Yurosek and Tremayne pulling their heads out of their nether regions) changes the picture entirely. I have no doubt that's the line Shaw will be trying to sell. But in a bigger picture health of the program sense, it's hard to see a program that's gone about a calendar year without a major college football win reversing this. Stanford's bottom of Power Five football ways are clearly not a fluke. It's who we are. I can't watch either our games or our frustrated try-hard-but-can't-compete players' interviews and think this is a coaching staff, roster, or culture that will turn things around. Sadly, for Stanford to have any real major college football prospects going forward a disastrous season may very well be better or us than a mediocre one.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - dabigv13 - 09-25-2022

Regarding point 3, turnover margin is mostly a matter of luck/chance and game situation. If you are usually ahead and running the ball, you will almost certainly have a positive margin, and if you are usually behind and passing it will almost certainly be negative.

Given our weak team we will probably have a negative margin. But given the randomness of turnovers, it's probably unlikely we will continue to have as negative of a margin as we presently do. That's about as much optimism as I can manage for this squad.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/24142400/coaches-their-everlasting-quest-coach-turnovers

https://mgoblog.com/diaries/turnovers-and-randomness

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - george - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 09:14 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: To those of you who are die hards, follow and still watch Stanford Football in its current state, is there any front on which to feel good about the program?

Hey OutsiderFan, you asked in a different thread, but getting to read thoughtful and insightful analysis like this from msqueri is one of the things I feel good about. Does that count?

Matt, thanks so much for making me feel like the 3.5 hours I spent watching the team last night wasn't a complete waste of time. I am curious about this one though:

(09-25-2022, 09:20 AM)msqueri Wrote: Sadly, for Stanford to have any real major college football prospects going forward a disastrous season may very well be better or us than a mediocre one.

I can't help but wonder if a disastrous season truly would result in any changes. As bad as the start of this season feels coming off the second 2/3rds of last season, we are not yet in Walt Harris territory. I also don't get the sense Muir has the same passion for (or alignment from the administration on) football results that Bowlsby did.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - msqueri - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 10:28 AM)george Wrote:
(09-25-2022, 09:14 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: To those of you who are die hards, follow and still watch Stanford Football in its current state, is there any front on which to feel good about the program?

Hey OutsiderFan, you asked in a different thread, but getting to read thoughtful and insightful analysis like this from msqueri is one of the things I feel good about. Does that count?

Matt, thanks so much for making me feel like the 3.5 hours I spent watching the team last night wasn't a complete waste of time. I am curious about this one though:

(09-25-2022, 09:20 AM)msqueri Wrote: Sadly, for Stanford to have any real major college football prospects going forward a disastrous season may very well be better or us than a mediocre one.

I can't help but wonder if a disastrous season truly would result in any changes. As bad as the start of this season feels coming off the second 2/3rds of last season, we are not yet in Walt Harris territory. I also don't get the sense Muir has the same passion for (or alignment from the administration on) football results that Bowlsby did.

It’s too early to say we’re not in Walt Harris territory. Certainly the length between major college football wins is as bad as Harris. Let’s see how bad it is at the end of the year. I think Shaw may be getting tired of this, which in itself could lead to anywhere from big (assistants) to tectonic (retirement) change.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - Mick - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 10:38 AM)msqueri Wrote: It’s too early to say we’re not in Walt Harris territory. Certainly the length between major college football wins is worse than Harris. Let’s see how bad it is at the end of the year. I think Shaw may be getting tired of this, which in itself could lead to anywhere from big (assistants) to tectonic (retirement) change.

Nothing that four galaxy-class recruiters, an amazing QB coach, a singular strength and conditioning coach, a brand new head coach, and two NFL-level coordinators couldn't cure...

And I suspect we'll have them after a 4-8 season.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - MV72018 - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 10:44 AM)Mick Wrote:
(09-25-2022, 10:38 AM)msqueri Wrote: It’s too early to say we’re not in Walt Harris territory. Certainly the length between major college football wins is worse than Harris. Let’s see how bad it is at the end of the year. I think Shaw may be getting tired of this, which in itself could lead to anywhere from big (assistants) to tectonic (retirement) change.

Nothing that four galaxy-class recruiters, an amazing QB coach, a singular strength and conditioning coach, a brand new head coach, and two NFL-level coordinators couldn't cure...

And I suspect we'll have them after a 4-8 season.

And where are the other three Ws going to come from? Curious minds want to know. ASU? Cal? WSU? BYU? I see ASU as the only realistic chance.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - Mick - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 11:04 AM)MV72018 Wrote:
(09-25-2022, 10:44 AM)Mick Wrote:
(09-25-2022, 10:38 AM)msqueri Wrote: It’s too early to say we’re not in Walt Harris territory. Certainly the length between major college football wins is worse than Harris. Let’s see how bad it is at the end of the year. I think Shaw may be getting tired of this, which in itself could lead to anywhere from big (assistants) to tectonic (retirement) change.

Nothing that four galaxy-class recruiters, an amazing QB coach, a singular strength and conditioning coach, a brand new head coach, and two NFL-level coordinators couldn't cure...

And I suspect we'll have them after a 4-8 season.

And where are the other three Ws going to come from? Curious minds want to know. ASU? Cal? WSU? BYU? I see ASU as the only realistic chance.

ASU, BYU, Cal

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - qwerty49 - 09-25-2022

Excellent analysis, as usual, by msqueri.

I really have to agree that Kelly is overrated. I'm guessing he shines in practice because he's going against WRs who can't consistently get separation. And he's probably the best CB we've got.

Losing Bragg was a big deal for the OL this year. Yes, McKee is a statue back there, but no one deserves to be the next Trent Edwards. Let's hope he makes it through the season uninjured.

We just don't have the horses at the LOS on both sides of the ball. It was painful watching our DL get pushed around like that. I think "edge" just means "too small for the DL and too slow for LB."

Bottom line, this is all about Jessies and Joes this year, and for the foreseeable future.

I used to dislike Petros, but he went out of his way on the broadcast to try to say nice things about Stanford.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - RuralFan - 09-25-2022

It seems to me Stanford is very much in a wait and see mode. Wait and see what happens to the PAC 12 Conference. Wait and see what happens to NIL and the rules surrounding it. Wait and see what happens to the transfer portal. The future of Stanford Football depends far more on these factors than on the current Stanford AD, the current Stanford Football coach, and the Stanford Football record in 2022.

While I am a big fan of Stanford athletic teams. I'm just not smart enough to define a future role for Stanford athletics that is compatible with the other significant goals of Stanford University. Hopefully someone has a vision Stanford athletics that is compatible with our past culture of athletic competitiveness in this brave new world.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - cardcrimson - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 11:48 AM)RuralFan Wrote: It seems to me Stanford is very much in a wait and see mode. Wait and see what happens to the PAC 12 Conference. Wait and see what happens to NIL and the rules surrounding it. Wait and see what happens to the transfer portal. The future of Stanford Football depends far more on these factors than on the current Stanford AD, the current Stanford Football coach, and the Stanford Football record in 2022.

While I am a big fan of Stanford athletic teams. I'm just not smart enough to define a future role for Stanford athletics that is compatible with the other significant goals of Stanford University. Hopefully someone has a vision Stanford athletics that is compatible with our past culture of athletic competitiveness in this brave new world.

Leaders don't wait and see. We have no leaders.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - gailtate - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 11:45 AM)qwerty49 Wrote: Excellent analysis, as usual, by msqueri.

I really have to agree that Kelly is overrated. I'm guessing he shines in practice because he's going against WRs who can't consistently get separation. And he's probably the best CB we've got.

Losing Bragg was a big deal for the OL this year. Yes, McKee is a statue back there, but no one deserves to be the next Trent Edwards. Let's hope he makes it through the season uninjured.

We just don't have the horses at the LOS on both sides of the ball. It was painful watching our DL get pushed around like that. I think "edge" just means "too small for the DL and too slow for LB."

Bottom line, this is all about Jessies and Joes this year, and for the foreseeable future.

I used to dislike Petros, but he went out of his way on the broadcast to try to say nice things about Stanford.

:

I like Petros. Always have -- I heard his compliments to Stanford ring like a parent at a kiddie school concert saying encouraging things after wincing from off-key vocals and and squeaky clarinet solos.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - chrisk - 09-25-2022

UW’s impressive victory last night gives the PAC-12 4 teams in the AP Top 15, second only to the SEC.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - gailtate - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 01:22 PM)chrisk Wrote: UW’s impressive victory last night gives the PAC-12 4 teams in the AP Top 15, second only to the SEC.

This, on the heels of the GameDay crew, esp. Kirk Herbstreit, comment last Saturday that there are at SEVEN teams in Pac12 that are relevant nationally, and not one of them is Stanford. His clear takeaway was, essentially, that the decline of this program is surprising and curious.
(Not for some us.)

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - MV72018 - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 11:45 AM)qwerty49 Wrote: Excellent analysis, as usual, by msqueri.

I really have to agree that Kelly is overrated. I'm guessing he shines in practice because he's going against WRs who can't consistently get separation. And he's probably the best CB we've got.

Losing Bragg was a big deal for the OL this year. Yes, McKee is a statue back there, but no one deserves to be the next Trent Edwards. Let's hope he makes it through the season uninjured.

We just don't have the horses at the LOS on both sides of the ball. It was painful watching our DL get pushed around like that. I think "edge" just means "too small for the DL and too slow for LB."

Bottom line, this is all about Jessies and Joes this year, and for the foreseeable future.

I used to dislike Petros, but he went out of his way on the broadcast to try to say nice things about Stanford.

I agree wholeheartedly. In fact, I thought he was too kind to Stanford.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - PersonalLegend - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 09:53 AM)dabigv13 Wrote: Regarding point 3, turnover margin is mostly a matter of luck/chance and game situation. If you are usually ahead and running the ball, you will almost certainly have a positive margin, and if you are usually behind and passing it will almost certainly be negative.

Given our weak team we will probably have a negative margin. But given the randomness of turnovers, it's probably unlikely we will continue to have as negative of a margin as we presently do. That's about as much optimism as I can manage for this squad.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/24142400/coaches-their-everlasting-quest-coach-turnovers

https://mgoblog.com/diaries/turnovers-and-randomness

Actually it’s not so simple. Good teams with depth bench guys who turn the ball over. Teams with no depth have to stick with the best athlete even if they cough it up. Bill belechik is legendary for sitting guys who fumble.

(09-25-2022, 11:57 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:
(09-25-2022, 11:48 AM)RuralFan Wrote:

Leaders don't wait and see. We have no leaders.

You must be getting old. There’s a new kind of leader out there. He goes with the flow and then says “see, I told you so” when the flow is right and “that wasn’t my call” when the flow is wrong. No political comment needed or appropriate for this board. It’s the way too many young people are being brought up these days.

Leadership is no longer testing your hypothesis, it’s fitting your hypothesis to the data, to talk nerdy on it.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - CowboyIndian - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 11:45 AM)qwerty49 Wrote: I used to dislike Petros, but he went out of his way on the broadcast to try to say nice things about Stanford.

Wondering why. He has always said very nice things about Stanford but you may have other reasons. Watch or listen to his commentary on the "What's your deal?" game back in 2009. Plus, I think he can be very funny, although I think he's been told to rein that in, judging by his comments recently.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Washington - winflop - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 10:44 AM)Mick Wrote: And I suspect we'll have them after a 4-8 season.

Wow 4-8 that's optimistic. 2-10 wouldn't surprise me