The CardBoard
Sunday afternoon thoughts - NC State - 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 afternoon thoughts - NC State (/thread-26371.html)


Sunday afternoon thoughts - NC State - msqueri - 10-24-2026

1. That was fun for the few who bothered to watch. This is the kind of competent plucking of low-hanging fruit that if we start doing enough of maybe we can bring a bushel to market someday. With NC State not good, heavily injured, traveling cross-country to play at a bad time of day, and deprived of an important touchdown by a questionable penalty, we had a lot working in our favor. We capitalized. In many senses this was similar to the Georgia Tech game. The bottom line is we won both of them. Many have rightly pointed out the duality of being .500 tied for the most wins we've had in a season this era while also being an objectively bad team with no fans. The main thought I have coming out of last night is the reason it seems like a complex duality is that we've actually managed to win some games. That sure beats the alternative. All teams have to face headwinds and tailwinds and it's ultimately the results that matter. We won and played better yesterday. We now have four wins with legitimate prospects for more. Happy days by our standards.

2. My last thought last week was challenging the team to look like an FBS team two games in a row for the first time under Pritchard. They surpassed that by looking like a Power Four team for only the second time this season. This was the second best scoreboard outcome of the Pritchard era, a score befitting a top 70 team (Georgia Tech was befitting a top 60 team). Most encouraging to me is not only have we won half our games this year, we've done better than the opponent in yards per play in each of those wins. We only did that twice last year, once in 2024, twice in 2023, once in 2022, and three times in 2021. As a result, even as bad as the blowout losses have been, this is by far our best year of the era in overall yards per play margin, -0.94 compared to last year's -1.23, which itself was better than the prior four years. While I lament that Pritchard has yet to have what I would call a good game (a scoreboard outcome befitting a top 25 team at least for one day....at the bare minimum teams should occasionally be able to look top 40), we are seeing some underlying signs of progress.

3. One area not progressing is attendance. Others have beaten this horse but I have to get some licks in too. It's just too existential of a question of why bother to field a major team if nobody cares. Throughout last year I had a thesis that winning at home would build habits of community and gradually build back enthusiasm as fans got used to leaving Stanford stadium happy. On top of that, our administrators have focused on game experience with theme nights, concessions, cabanas, concerts, new stadium lighting, and other bells and whistles. What we've seen so far is Stanford winning nine of our last 12 home games (!!!!), owning the C-House, and yet despite the winning and the investment, nobody comes to the games. Elon and NC State were as bad as it's ever been. Attendance can lag results by years - and our overall results still feed a narrative of the worst team in Power Four - but I admit that what we've seen with attendance is disheartening. I am not sure Stanford will ever have enthusiasm around the program (again, have won nine of the last 12 home games!). All there is to do is keep plugging away and hope winning and attendant improvements to the program somehow revive the corpse. Because this isn't The Library, it's The Mausoleum (hat tip @anurag41).

4. While the defense made enough stops not to screw it up, this game was clearly won by the offense. We scored 3.44 points per drive (excluding the victory formation), scoring like the #11 points per drive offense whereas our season level is the #123 offense. There's a big enemy gets a vote element here, as NC State came in a terrible #115 in points per drive defense and will now fall further after we made them look like #128. Still, it's nice to score and we scored more than their norm allowed. The defense gave up 3.11 points per drive (excluding the last play of the first half), defending like the #120 defense (on the season we're #133) and making NC State's offense look like the #23 points per drive offense whereas they came in #53. We had the most yards per play of the Pritchard era against an FBS opponent, slightly shy of the Elon mark, and the fewest yards per play allowed in ACC play this season. Here too the offense was the impressive part, getting more than half a yard per play more than NC State's average allowed (notably, better than Wake Forest and Virginia did). The defense held NC State just slightly under its norm but that's misleading because it's entirely a function of the Richmond blowout. No FBS team has defended NC State as poorly as we did. I don't want to overdraw this point as we were within 0.3 yards per play allowed of Vanderbilt, Appalachian State, and Louisville, but those are bad defenses so that's kind of cold comfort. The bottom line is the offense came to play and the defense did just enough to hang on. There remains nothing good to say about the job Kris Richard has done.

5. The offense's success was balanced and very fun to watch. It was the second or third best passing performance of the season across metrics. While it was only middle-of-the-road compared to what NC State's atrocious pass defense typically allows, that's good enough for a lot of yards and touchdowns because, again, atrocious pass D. The run game built on its Elon confidence boost and is coming alive, pivotal for the second straight game. NC State has a bad run defense but even still we had almost a yard per carry more than their average allowed, better than all but Louisville and Vanderbilt, the latter of which we weren't far behind. I won't crow too much because Vandy has a terrible run game and still outgained us per carry and NC State is not much resistance to run games. Nonetheless, the salient comparison in my view is how we ran against the bad Georgia Tech defense in an extremely similar game (poorly) versus how we did in this game (well, well over double as effective). The run game is improving. If we keep it up, the Cal and SMU games will both be winnable.

6. Defense didn't thrive. Louisville is the only FBS team to give up a worse yard per attempt to the Wolfpack, though Louisville, App State, and Vandy all gave up slightly worse passer rating. We were basically in the ballpark of subpar pass defenses. The run defense was almost identical in every stat to how we did against Miami, better than all but Hawaii (Miami, by the way, is one of the top rushing teams in America, so it remains an oddity that we bottled them up on the ground....of course they didn't need it). This is one area I am going to just come out and say we got super lucky on the timing of this game (on the schedule and on the kickoff time) to play backups at running back and across the offensive line, including a third (or fourth?) center. NC State's run game has quite understandably imploded in the face of injury. Compared to their last two opponents, we gave up six times as many yards per carry as Wake Forest and over a yard more per carry than Louisville. Vandy is the only power team to do worse in run defense. This was just luck.

RE: Sunday afternoon thoughts - NC State - msqueri - 10-24-2026

7. Warren's connection with High was fun to watch and the QB continues to take care of the ball, not take sacks (the one knocking us out of field goal range brutal but an exception that proves the rule), and manage the offense. The touchdown drive at the end of the first half was a thing of beauty. We're well served with Warren at QB. Total QBR judged it his second best game at Stanford, after Georgia Tech. He's moved up to 68th in the nation and 10th in the ACC, very respectable. And yet it wouldn't even occur to me to give him a game ball with the stellar games by our playmakers. Ford has had the first two 200+ yards from scrimmage games of his career in the last seven days. The only other time this era a Stanford player has done it even once was Ayomanor's Colorado game. Ford's lovely week is the most productive back-to-back games for a Stanford playmaker since Bryce Love in 2017. Ford is now 31st in America in yards from scrimmage, 32nd in rushing, and on pace for a 1000 yard rushing season. He has really changed the arc of his year. High was the energizer bunny on the first drive (to say nothing of the later touchdown), the success of which may have been crucial for the win and one of the more important opening drives of this era. With his second 100 yard game of the season and fourth of his Stanford career, High is now on the national receiving leaderboards, just ahead of the output CJ Williams had last year. If High does it twice more at Stanford he ties Ayomanor for most of this era. He'll be playing in the NFL. The Warren to Hall on 3rd and a mile in the fourth quarter trying to hold on to the lead was so clutch. Very happy for Hall becoming a key cog after a brutal start to his year and career. Hampton had a nice game. [Moving the chains (first down) leaderboard: Ford (9), High (7), Nico Brown (3), Hall (3), Warren, Hampton, Irvin, Blackburn] The PFF grading did not assess the offensive acumen to be unit-wide but rather great performances by Warren and High, good by Ford, Prongos, Hall, and Brown, solid by the tight ends, and weak links from Onovughe, Pale, House, and Anderson. I was surprised to see that judgment on the line considering the size of the holes my eyes observed. I also want to shout out the line's pass protection. Two thirds of the way through the season, we are 65th in sacks allowed per game. Our best finish in this category in the previous five years was 96th. Our PFF pass blocking grade is 99th, which is less impressive but consider that we haven't done better than 96th this era. The line, coaching, and Warren all probably deserve some credit for this improvement.

8. I mentioned the defense making just enough plays to hold on and to me what epitomized that in this game was Tafiti. He has had a quiet year and was only ok the first three quarters (a tackle for loss is nice), but he turned it up a gear in crunch time with the sack and three hurries. It's kind of boring to say BMO is our best defender but he is. I loved seeing the penetration Briehler managed and especially getting the hurry on Sumlin's awesome third down dislodging to force a punt and the crunch time tackle for loss, as Briehler did some solid work earlier that just didn't get home in time to prevent the play. Mattingly, like usual, seemed an active and not disciplined Jekyll and Hyde. I did observe to myself, as I have for decades, that off-ball linebackers always get the most gushing and uncritical commentary from announcers. PFF liked what it saw from Galvan (happy for him to wipe some bad taste out), Tafiti, Sumlin, and Davis and thought many others were serviceable, judging the weak links to be Eckhardt (brutal, of course mainly due to the 58 yard touchdown he screwed up), Bachhuber, Richardson, Green, and Rowell. I don't think we've talked about it here but Cooper has been benched, only about 11 snaps per game over the last three games; yesterday he made his snaps count, having one of his best games at Stanford despite the lack of run, notably contributing a pass breakup and third down run stop. We are 135th in sacks per game and yesterday the novelty of Tafiti's and accidental nature of Bachhuber's were reminders that this is something we've utterly lacked this year.

9. I hear the calls for Chris Davis Jr. to get a game ball due to corraling the onside kick but game balls for me require more than one play and his others were kick returns of 13 to give up 9 of field position and 16 to give up 7. I am with those who think there is definitely one or both of bad special teams coaching by Kaczor (to coach a team that so frequently gets tackled before the 20 and/or to not tell Davis not to take back all these kicks, take your pick) and Davis being a horribly selfish player. Not 100 percent confident in either of those but confident it's at least one of them. Davis leads the nation in number of kick returns. That's an unfortunate stat on two levels (the number of times we receive a kick and the number of times we don't just take the free touchback yards). So no game ball. Special teams game ball is clearly Flintoft. His higher profile job had net punts of 44 to the 26 (good), 48 to the 40 (very good), and 35 to the 11 (good). His role you usually don't think about unless something is wrong (holder) teamed with Kenney to save the day and bail out Chavez on the crappy snap on Kenney's crucial 31 yard field goal. Big contributions by Flintoft yesterday. Elsewhere on special teams, Hampton had a nice return erased by Vaccarello's hold and there were coverage tackles by Eckhardt, Edwards, Lugolobi, and Johnson (most notably, and big team energy boost). I'll put this in special teams because the opportunity cost of the calls were not kicking/punting: in real time I hated the 4th and 20 and the 4th and 4. One didn't work out and one very much did. Pritchard's postgame explanation was credible and defensible, as much as I mocked him on a CSR text chain about the 4th and 20. On balance I don't hate Wildman Tavita. I've said for years football should be less about special teams. Tavita actually lives it and goes for more points. This is of course inextricably linked to the problems in our place kicking operation. Hope that can be better next year.

10. Game balls: Caden High, Tevarua Tafiti, Aidan Flintoft, Malcolm Agnew

11. This win makes it more likely than not that we get to five wins (though losing out is very much in play given our level of play so far), which Luck and Pritchard would certainly aggressively sell as our most wins since 2018. Next up is an approximately Wake Forest level of challenge in Louisville. Given how we've performed on the road in the ACC era, it's hard to get hopes up. The way I'm thinking about it is we could win any of the remaining games but the likelihood ratchets up each week between now and Thanksgiving from very low likelihood against Louisville to almost a tossup against Cal, with SMU our second most winnable game left. The thing that would really boost our narrative is if we could exorcise ACC road demons and win a true cross-country game. Fat chance. Keeping Louisville even within 24 might actually be progress compared to our recent history. But that's why they play the games. If we do win one of the next two, it would be hard to deny the narrative victory Pritchard would have accomplished. Next week against Louisville is the first chance to do that.

RE: Sunday afternoon thoughts - NC State - cctop - 10-24-2026

(10-24-2026, 02:06 PM)msqueri Wrote:  despite the winning and the investment, nobody comes to the games.. Attendance can lag results by years ....All there is to do is keep plugging away and hope winning and attendant improvements to the program somehow revive the corpse.

Can anyone dig up Terry2's excellent analysis of attendance, and more specifically the lack of fans even when we were winning?

If I recall correctly his conclusion was that you need two back-to-back winning seasons before attendance starts to rise.  You need to give your fans an expectation of winning.

RE: Sunday afternoon thoughts - NC State - 82lsju - 10-24-2026

(10-24-2026, 02:06 PM)msqueri Wrote:  3. One area not progressing is attendance. Others have beaten this horse but I have to get some licks in too. It's just too existential of a question of why bother to field a major team if nobody cares. Throughout last year I had a thesis that winning at home would build habits of community and gradually build back enthusiasm as fans got used to leaving Stanford stadium happy. On top of that, our administrators have focused on game experience with theme nights, concessions, cabanas, concerts, new stadium lighting, and other bells and whistles. What we've seen so far is Stanford winning nine of our last 12 home games (!!!!), owning the C-House, and yet despite the winning and the investment, nobody comes to the games. Elon and NC State were as bad as it's ever been. Attendance can lag results by years - and our overall results still feed a narrative of the worst team in Power Four - but I admit that what we've seen with attendance is disheartening. I am not sure Stanford will ever have enthusiasm around the program (again, have won nine of the last 12 home games!). All there is to do is keep plugging away and hope winning and attendant improvements to the program somehow revive the corpse. Because this isn't The Library, it's The Mausoleum (hat tip @anurag41).

as one of the few who still goes to games (although I did leave before the game was over last night) there are a few issues with getting people to games (and dropped my second ticket a few years ago as I could not give it away)

1.  many people don't really care about the current cast of opponents (e.g., anyone in the ACC (except Cal) or the likes of Elon.  There is no history or rivalry to get people to show up.  

2.  for as long as I can remember they goal of Stanford football was the Rose Bowl, which is no longer really a goal other than as a part of the CFP

3.  people have beat to death the late kick-offs (three this season, maybe a fourth depending on the SMU kick-off), I think this is a bigger problem than not knowing the kick-off until 12 or 6 days before the game.  We've now lost all the people in our group who live over an hour from the Stadium as they don't really want to get home after midnight, and currently 

4.  even back in the good run not all that long ago there were still a fair number of sold but empty seats for the games not involving USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, or Cal

RE: Sunday afternoon thoughts - NC State - BostonCard - 10-24-2026

Lastly, with the availability and quality of television, the gap between the in person experience and the at home experience is virtually non-existent and depending on your set-up, arguably better at home.  As nice as the site lines are at the stadium, there is no question that the viewing is better at home.  With the diminishing quality of the stadium concessions, the food is probably better too.

BC

RE: Sunday afternoon thoughts - NC State - 82lsju - 10-24-2026

(10-24-2026, 05:20 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  Lastly, with the availability and quality of television, the gap between the in person experience and the at home experience is virtually non-existent and depending on your set-up, arguably better at home.  As nice as the site lines are at the stadium, there is no question that the viewing is better at home.  With the diminishing quality of the stadium concessions, the food is probably better too.

BC

and certainly being able to see replays is much much better at home than in the stadium and you can start watching the game after it started and skip the commercials, there were an awful lot of 3 minute plus commercial breaks in the first half last night that I would have like to have skipped.....

RE: Sunday afternoon thoughts - NC State - cardcrimson - 10-25-2026

SIAP, Stanford is 4-0 against the ACC in games started at or later than 7pm Pacific. They're 3-14 in all other ACC games. . . .

RE: Sunday afternoon thoughts - NC State - Mick - 10-25-2026

(10-25-2026, 02:13 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:  SIAP, Stanford is 4-0 against the ACC in games started at or later than 7pm Pacific. They're 3-14 in all other ACC games. . . .

The Stanford Sleep Deprivation Experiment/Experience...