[d4cohn]

That was far too close. I am so pissed off at the way the 4th quarter was managed, a couple more good throws from that ASU QB and we're in overtime right now.

Except Shaw knows the QB we are facing. Wilkins is not Herbert. ASU fans have been livid with him for a while. Do I think Shaw should have thrown on 2nd or 3rd down on the second to last drive? Yes. But he played the odds, leaned on his D, and ensured we didn't give it away with a turnover or a pick-six (which we just had last game, and we all know how that changed the complexion of the game).

That's ridiculous. Wilkins can make those throws. The fact that he only does it half the time (or whatever) is no excuse for throwing up your hands and saying "eh I like our odds on defense". Costello's completion percentage was, what, 75%? Throw a quick ball to JJ and let him do some damage! Or to Irwin! Or try something with one of the fast youngsters! Hell even a tunnel screen to Speights! Just SOMETHING besides "we know we can't gain 10 yards in 3 telegraphed runs but we're gonna try anyway!" It would sort of be excusable on that last drive if he hadn't done twice just before that.

How many first downs did we have in the fourth quarter? One? It's completely inexcusable. That was godawful, stupid, "playing to not lose" coaching and I expect better from Shaw. I think I'm more pissed off with this win than the loss to Utah, because at least in that game it was fluky turnovers that killed us, something you don't expect to happen again. But this asinine conservatism could certainly happen again and I honestly thought we were passed it.

And if Costello had thrown a pick six, or had a turnover in our plus territory (which ASU would have almost undoubtedly cashed in, with far more time, and most consequentially, 60 fewer yards to cover) we would be ripping Shaw for "having Costello throw", when surely he should have seen the pick-six against Utah, or the turnovers against Utah in general from Costello, Scarlett et al. Or if Costello fumbled from holding onto the ball or something, Shaw should have known better, given the struggles of the OL to hold up in protection.

And no, I will never be more upset with wins (particularly on the road against albeit a middle of the road Pac-12 team) than blowing home games with pick sixes, roughing the punter, fumbles etc.

And this wasn't even close to the worst performance in win a game during the Shaw era (which was last year's miracle at Oregon State). I will save my frustration for losses, particularly at home, which go a long way toward deciding division and conference crowns and the like.

[d4cohn]

That was far too close. I am so pissed off at the way the 4th quarter was managed, a couple more good throws from that ASU QB and we're in overtime right now.

Except Shaw knows the QB we are facing. Wilkins is not Herbert. ASU fans have been livid with him for a while. Do I think Shaw should have thrown on 2nd or 3rd down on the second to last drive? Yes. But he played the odds, leaned on his D, and ensured we didn't give it away with a turnover or a pick-six (which we just had last game, and we all know how that changed the complexion of the game).

That's ridiculous. Wilkins can make those throws. The fact that he only does it half the time (or whatever) is no excuse for throwing up your hands and saying "eh I like our odds on defense". Costello's completion percentage was, what, 75%? Throw a quick ball to JJ and let him do some damage! Or to Irwin! Or try something with one of the fast youngsters! Hell even a tunnel screen to Speights! Just SOMETHING besides "we know we can't gain 10 yards in 3 telegraphed runs but we're gonna try anyway!" It would sort of be excusable on that last drive if he hadn't done twice just before that.

How many first downs did we have in the fourth quarter? One? It's completely inexcusable. That was godawful, stupid, "playing to not lose" coaching and I expect better from Shaw. I think I'm more pissed off with this win than the loss to Utah, because at least in that game it was fluky turnovers that killed us, something you don't expect to happen again. But this asinine conservatism could certainly happen again and I honestly thought we were passed it.

And if Costello had thrown a pick six, or had a turnover in our plus territory (which ASU would have almost undoubtedly cashed in, with far more time, and most consequentially, 60 fewer yards to cover) we would be ripping Shaw for "having Costello throw", when surely he should have seen the pick-six against Utah, or the turnovers against Utah in general from Costello, Scarlett et al. Or if Costello fumbled from holding onto the ball or something, Shaw should have known better, given the struggles of the OL to hold up in protection.

And no, I will never be more upset with wins (particularly on the road against albeit a middle of the road Pac-12 team) than blowing home games with pick sixes, roughing the punter, fumbles etc.

And this wasn't even close to the worst performance in win a game during the Shaw era (which was last year's miracle at Oregon State). I will save my frustration for losses, particularly at home, which go a long way toward deciding division and conference crowns and the like.

[washingtonismoney]

I don't think anyone here is pretending mixing in some throws -- or, for that matter, the mysteriously disappearing reverse or fly sweep plays -- would be a panacea. Just that we know this team isn't a shove-the-ball-down-the-opponents'-throat team and in fact seems to be unusually susceptible to giving up tackles for loss. Given that, running all the time from standard sets just looks quixotic or like wishcasting.

[washingtonismoney]

I don't think anyone here is pretending mixing in some throws -- or, for that matter, the mysteriously disappearing reverse or fly sweep plays -- would be a panacea. Just that we know this team isn't a shove-the-ball-down-the-opponents'-throat team and in fact seems to be unusually susceptible to giving up tackles for loss. Given that, running all the time from standard sets just looks quixotic or like wishcasting.

[81alum]

Well, at least it was a win, and it was the kind of win that will not inspire overconfidence going forward.  I thought our defense looked better than it has for a while.   Having time of possession 38 minutes was good. 

But the fact remains that the next two games we will face much better teams and we will lose to both of them if our offensive line doesn't start playing better than this.

[81alum]

Well, at least it was a win, and it was the kind of win that will not inspire overconfidence going forward.  I thought our defense looked better than it has for a while.   Having time of possession 38 minutes was good. 

But the fact remains that the next two games we will face much better teams and we will lose to both of them if our offensive line doesn't start playing better than this.

[CardinalSagehen]

For anyone that feels the need, in spite of a win, to decry Shaw’s running the ball with a 7-point lead late in the 4th, I say this:
1) He will never change. 
2) Would you rather have Mike Leach throwing to Quenton Meeks with 3:33 remaining?  23 seconds into this one: https://youtu.be/g02Vs6aW__8
3) Shaw’s playing not to lose most often results in... not losing. There are many proof points and very few counter-examples.  

You can criticize this year’s play-calling in general and our stubborn running to set up the pass rather than vice-versa.  But when it comes to playing with a lead in the 4th, Shaw’s unemotional decision-making and resistance of the urge to step on throats is actually a strength.

[CardinalSagehen]

For anyone that feels the need, in spite of a win, to decry Shaw’s running the ball with a 7-point lead late in the 4th, I say this:
1) He will never change. 
2) Would you rather have Mike Leach throwing to Quenton Meeks with 3:33 remaining?  23 seconds into this one: https://youtu.be/g02Vs6aW__8
3) Shaw’s playing not to lose most often results in... not losing. There are many proof points and very few counter-examples.  

You can criticize this year’s play-calling in general and our stubborn running to set up the pass rather than vice-versa.  But when it comes to playing with a lead in the 4th, Shaw’s unemotional decision-making and resistance of the urge to step on throats is actually a strength.

[BostonCard]

I was out to dinner the whole second half.  Sounds like I missed two great drives in the third quarter, a few nice plays by adebo and not much else.

BC

[BostonCard]

I was out to dinner the whole second half.  Sounds like I missed two great drives in the third quarter, a few nice plays by adebo and not much else.

BC

[newguy]

way to go defense.
especially Paulson Adebo.  he's a gamer.

[newguy]

way to go defense.
especially Paulson Adebo.  he's a gamer.

[JPR36]

For anyone that feels the need, in spite of a win, to decry Shaw’s running the ball with a 7-point lead late in the 4th, I say this:
1) He will never change. 
2) Would you rather have Mike Leach throwing to Quenton Meeks with 3:33 remaining?  23 seconds into this one: https://youtu.be/g02Vs6aW__8
3) Shaw’s playing not to lose most often results in... not losing. There are many proof points and very few counter-examples.  

You can criticize this year’s play-calling in general and our stubborn running to set up the pass rather than vice-versa.  But when it comes to playing with a lead in the 4th, Shaw’s unemotional decision-making and resistance of the urge to step on throats is actually a strength.

Actually I don't think the Quentin Meeks analogy is a particularly good one because we still would have lost if the Wazzu kicker hadn't Couged a very makeable field goal as time expired.
I don't have a big problem with Shaw playing it conservatively on our last possession. Whether he needed to play that way the entire fourth quarter is, I think, at least debatable.
I do agree he ain't gonna change, so it doesn't do much good to complain about it.

[JPR36]

For anyone that feels the need, in spite of a win, to decry Shaw’s running the ball with a 7-point lead late in the 4th, I say this:
1) He will never change. 
2) Would you rather have Mike Leach throwing to Quenton Meeks with 3:33 remaining?  23 seconds into this one: https://youtu.be/g02Vs6aW__8
3) Shaw’s playing not to lose most often results in... not losing. There are many proof points and very few counter-examples.  

You can criticize this year’s play-calling in general and our stubborn running to set up the pass rather than vice-versa.  But when it comes to playing with a lead in the 4th, Shaw’s unemotional decision-making and resistance of the urge to step on throats is actually a strength.

Actually I don't think the Quentin Meeks analogy is a particularly good one because we still would have lost if the Wazzu kicker hadn't Couged a very makeable field goal as time expired.
I don't have a big problem with Shaw playing it conservatively on our last possession. Whether he needed to play that way the entire fourth quarter is, I think, at least debatable.
I do agree he ain't gonna change, so it doesn't do much good to complain about it.

[OutsiderFan]

I was out to dinner the whole second half.  Sounds like I missed two great drives in the third quarter, a few nice plays by adebo and not much else.

BC

Pretty much. It was like this: 

Let's play it tight and see if we can establish the run early.  Uh oh, we better do something, so let's try scoring.  With a 14 pt lead, let's not take any chances and try killing the clock.

Literally, that's how it went. Not inspiring or entertaining at all. When fans would rather go out to dinner than watch Stanford play football, that's a real problem. You are in the entertainment business. Give us a reason to pay attention.

I find myself watching less of Stanford games this season than ever before:

Watched all of SDSU
Watched half of USC
Watched none of UCD
Watched 3/4 of Oregon
Watched 1/3 Notre Dame
Watched 1/3 of Utah
Watched 3/4 of ASU

Entertain me, and I'll watch. Bore me and I won't.

[OutsiderFan]

I was out to dinner the whole second half.  Sounds like I missed two great drives in the third quarter, a few nice plays by adebo and not much else.

BC

Pretty much. It was like this: 

Let's play it tight and see if we can establish the run early.  Uh oh, we better do something, so let's try scoring.  With a 14 pt lead, let's not take any chances and try killing the clock.

Literally, that's how it went. Not inspiring or entertaining at all. When fans would rather go out to dinner than watch Stanford play football, that's a real problem. You are in the entertainment business. Give us a reason to pay attention.

I find myself watching less of Stanford games this season than ever before:

Watched all of SDSU
Watched half of USC
Watched none of UCD
Watched 3/4 of Oregon
Watched 1/3 Notre Dame
Watched 1/3 of Utah
Watched 3/4 of ASU

Entertain me, and I'll watch. Bore me and I won't.

[JPR36]

I was out to dinner the whole second half.  Sounds like I missed two great drives in the third quarter, a few nice plays by adebo and not much else.

BC

Pretty much. It was like this: 

Let's play it tight and see if we can establish the run early.  Uh oh, we better do something, so let's try scoring.  With a 14 pt lead, let's not take any chances and try killing the clock.

Literally, that's how it went. Not inspiring or entertaining at all. When fans would rather go out to dinner than watch Stanford play football, that's a real problem. You are in the entertainment business. Give us a reason to pay attention.

I find myself watching less of Stanford games this season than ever before:

Watched all of SDSU
Watched half of USC
Watched none of UCD
Watched 3/4 of Oregon
Watched 1/3 Notre Dame
Watched 1/3 of Utah
Watched 3/4 of ASU

Entertain me, and I'll watch. Bore me and I won't.

I thought the third quarter was entertaining. The fourth quarter, with us spending all our time hanging on by our fingernails to a lead, not so much. It was more entertaining than a loss would have been, though.

[JPR36]

I was out to dinner the whole second half.  Sounds like I missed two great drives in the third quarter, a few nice plays by adebo and not much else.

BC

Pretty much. It was like this: 

Let's play it tight and see if we can establish the run early.  Uh oh, we better do something, so let's try scoring.  With a 14 pt lead, let's not take any chances and try killing the clock.

Literally, that's how it went. Not inspiring or entertaining at all. When fans would rather go out to dinner than watch Stanford play football, that's a real problem. You are in the entertainment business. Give us a reason to pay attention.

I find myself watching less of Stanford games this season than ever before:

Watched all of SDSU
Watched half of USC
Watched none of UCD
Watched 3/4 of Oregon
Watched 1/3 Notre Dame
Watched 1/3 of Utah
Watched 3/4 of ASU

Entertain me, and I'll watch. Bore me and I won't.

I thought the third quarter was entertaining. The fourth quarter, with us spending all our time hanging on by our fingernails to a lead, not so much. It was more entertaining than a loss would have been, though.

[winflop]

And no, I will never be more upset with wins (particularly on the road against albeit a middle of the road Pac-12 team) than blowing home games with pick sixes, roughing the punter, fumbles etc

I'm not more upset than I was 11 days ago, not even close. But that doesn't mean I'm happy about last night. The prevent offense was called too early (10 mins left) with too small a lead (14). Just because it worked out doesn't mean it was the right decision. We were dominating in Q3, the ASU defense had already been on the field for 30 mins, and it was gassed. They couldn't generate pressure on Costello without sending 5 or more, and play action was working beautifully. ShawVita threw all that in the trash when one more score would've put the game away for sure.

And Swann nearly cost us with another stupid play in the last series - and it was his second stupid play of the game - he didn't get called for the late hit/targeting in the first half. Combined with the stupid roughing the punter call in the last game, that points to undisciplined football and I hope the coaches address it quickly.

[winflop]

And no, I will never be more upset with wins (particularly on the road against albeit a middle of the road Pac-12 team) than blowing home games with pick sixes, roughing the punter, fumbles etc

I'm not more upset than I was 11 days ago, not even close. But that doesn't mean I'm happy about last night. The prevent offense was called too early (10 mins left) with too small a lead (14). Just because it worked out doesn't mean it was the right decision. We were dominating in Q3, the ASU defense had already been on the field for 30 mins, and it was gassed. They couldn't generate pressure on Costello without sending 5 or more, and play action was working beautifully. ShawVita threw all that in the trash when one more score would've put the game away for sure.

And Swann nearly cost us with another stupid play in the last series - and it was his second stupid play of the game - he didn't get called for the late hit/targeting in the first half. Combined with the stupid roughing the punter call in the last game, that points to undisciplined football and I hope the coaches address it quickly.

[ChicagoCard]

Was the holding call on Hamilton that negated a would-be TD legitimate? Almost looked like Hamilton and the defending just got tangled up a bit.

Terrible news in a different thread about Alfieri in a sling after the game...

[ChicagoCard]

Was the holding call on Hamilton that negated a would-be TD legitimate? Almost looked like Hamilton and the defending just got tangled up a bit.

Terrible news in a different thread about Alfieri in a sling after the game...

[ColoradoTree]

Was the holding call on Hamilton that negated a would-be TD legitimate? Almost looked like Hamilton and the defending just got tangled up a bit.

Terrible news in a different thread about Alfieri in a sling after the game...

It sure looked legitimate to me. He had his arms wrapped around the guy and took him down. Such a dumb play, since Scarlett was already past him. All Hamilton had to do there was stay close to that guy and keep him at arm's length--no need to grab there at all.

[ColoradoTree]

Was the holding call on Hamilton that negated a would-be TD legitimate? Almost looked like Hamilton and the defending just got tangled up a bit.

Terrible news in a different thread about Alfieri in a sling after the game...

It sure looked legitimate to me. He had his arms wrapped around the guy and took him down. Such a dumb play, since Scarlett was already past him. All Hamilton had to do there was stay close to that guy and keep him at arm's length--no need to grab there at all.

[JPR36]

Was the holding call on Hamilton that negated a would-be TD legitimate? Almost looked like Hamilton and the defending just got tangled up a bit.

Terrible news in a different thread about Alfieri in a sling after the game...

Alfieri is an excellent player, but he really does seem to have a problem staying healthy.
Of course, you could say that about half the team this year.

[JPR36]

Was the holding call on Hamilton that negated a would-be TD legitimate? Almost looked like Hamilton and the defending just got tangled up a bit.

Terrible news in a different thread about Alfieri in a sling after the game...

Alfieri is an excellent player, but he really does seem to have a problem staying healthy.
Of course, you could say that about half the team this year.

[stupac2]

And if Costello had thrown a pick six, or had a turnover in our plus territory (which ASU would have almost undoubtedly cashed in, with far more time, and most consequentially, 60 fewer yards to cover) we would be ripping Shaw for "having Costello throw", when surely he should have seen the pick-six against Utah, or the turnovers against Utah in general from Costello, Scarlett et al. Or if Costello fumbled from holding onto the ball or something, Shaw should have known better, given the struggles of the OL to hold up in protection.

Dude, I'm specifically talking about the entire fourth quarter. It would be one thing if we had tried to get a first down at any other point in the game, but we didn't! We had 3 possessions in the 4th, ran something like 12 plays, and tried TWO passes. And guess what? Both were successfully plays! Literally NONE of the runs were successful. So why keep doing it? And, after KJ has passed and scrambled for a 1st down near midfield, why just stop throwing? It had worked!

And no, I will never be more upset with wins (particularly on the road against albeit a middle of the road Pac-12 team) than blowing home games with pick sixes, roughing the punter, fumbles etc.

And this wasn't even close to the worst performance in win a game during the Shaw era (which was last year's miracle at Oregon State). I will save my frustration for losses, particularly at home, which go a long way toward deciding division and conference crowns and the like.

There's a difference between mistakes by players and mistakes by coaching. This was a mistake that trivially could've been prevented, even at ORST last year that wasn't true. That's why it's infuriating. It's one thing for a player to make a mistake in the heat of the moment, but while you're on the sideline needing one first down to win the game, with the opponent keying on the run and you just go into three times? Or up 14 with the ball where any points at all will ice the game and you just run into a wall 3 times and punt it back? TWICE??? This is 2018, not 1988. This is how you lose football games. It might not have cost us last night but it definitely will if he keeps doing it.

[stupac2]

And if Costello had thrown a pick six, or had a turnover in our plus territory (which ASU would have almost undoubtedly cashed in, with far more time, and most consequentially, 60 fewer yards to cover) we would be ripping Shaw for "having Costello throw", when surely he should have seen the pick-six against Utah, or the turnovers against Utah in general from Costello, Scarlett et al. Or if Costello fumbled from holding onto the ball or something, Shaw should have known better, given the struggles of the OL to hold up in protection.

Dude, I'm specifically talking about the entire fourth quarter. It would be one thing if we had tried to get a first down at any other point in the game, but we didn't! We had 3 possessions in the 4th, ran something like 12 plays, and tried TWO passes. And guess what? Both were successfully plays! Literally NONE of the runs were successful. So why keep doing it? And, after KJ has passed and scrambled for a 1st down near midfield, why just stop throwing? It had worked!

And no, I will never be more upset with wins (particularly on the road against albeit a middle of the road Pac-12 team) than blowing home games with pick sixes, roughing the punter, fumbles etc.

And this wasn't even close to the worst performance in win a game during the Shaw era (which was last year's miracle at Oregon State). I will save my frustration for losses, particularly at home, which go a long way toward deciding division and conference crowns and the like.

There's a difference between mistakes by players and mistakes by coaching. This was a mistake that trivially could've been prevented, even at ORST last year that wasn't true. That's why it's infuriating. It's one thing for a player to make a mistake in the heat of the moment, but while you're on the sideline needing one first down to win the game, with the opponent keying on the run and you just go into three times? Or up 14 with the ball where any points at all will ice the game and you just run into a wall 3 times and punt it back? TWICE??? This is 2018, not 1988. This is how you lose football games. It might not have cost us last night but it definitely will if he keeps doing it.

[OutsiderFan]

Was the holding call on Hamilton that negated a would-be TD legitimate? Almost looked like Hamilton and the defending just got tangled up a bit.

Terrible news in a different thread about Alfieri in a sling after the game...

Alfieri is an excellent player, but he really does seem to have a problem staying healthy.
Of course, you could say that about half the team this year.

Staying healthy is a skill Alfieri just doesn't have unfortunately. He's been constantly injured, even in high school.

[OutsiderFan]

Was the holding call on Hamilton that negated a would-be TD legitimate? Almost looked like Hamilton and the defending just got tangled up a bit.

Terrible news in a different thread about Alfieri in a sling after the game...

Alfieri is an excellent player, but he really does seem to have a problem staying healthy.
Of course, you could say that about half the team this year.

Staying healthy is a skill Alfieri just doesn't have unfortunately. He's been constantly injured, even in high school.

[Spiny_Norman]

BC, I think this summarizes what you missed in the 2H.

These were consecutive Stanford drives, starting in the 2nd quarter.
8 plays, 63 yards - FG
12 plays, 76 yards - FG
8 plays, 75 yards - TD
7 plays, 80 yards - TD

Followed by:
5 plays, 5 yards - punt
3 plays, -2 yards - punt
3 plays, 0 yards - punt
5 plays, 33 yards - punt

[Spiny_Norman]

BC, I think this summarizes what you missed in the 2H.

These were consecutive Stanford drives, starting in the 2nd quarter.
8 plays, 63 yards - FG
12 plays, 76 yards - FG
8 plays, 75 yards - TD
7 plays, 80 yards - TD

Followed by:
5 plays, 5 yards - punt
3 plays, -2 yards - punt
3 plays, 0 yards - punt
5 plays, 33 yards - punt

[needle]

In the early part of the fourth quarter, I don't think Shaw was motivated by conservatism as much as abetted by it. I think his main motivation was to try to get the running game/offensive line going.

[needle]

In the early part of the fourth quarter, I don't think Shaw was motivated by conservatism as much as abetted by it. I think his main motivation was to try to get the running game/offensive line going.

[d4cohn]

For anyone that feels the need, in spite of a win, to decry Shaw’s running the ball with a 7-point lead late in the 4th, I say this:
1) He will never change. 
2) Would you rather have Mike Leach throwing to Quenton Meeks with 3:33 remaining?  23 seconds into this one: https://youtu.be/g02Vs6aW__8
3) Shaw’s playing not to lose most often results in... not losing. There are many proof points and very few counter-examples.  

You can criticize this year’s play-calling in general and our stubborn running to set up the pass rather than vice-versa.  But when it comes to playing with a lead in the 4th, Shaw’s unemotional decision-making and resistance of the urge to step on throats is actually a strength.

I think Cardinal Sagehen makes some very cogent points. I am going to focus on the potential counter-example games, rather than the proof points, in examining this. 

The breadth of our losses in Shaw era:

2011 Oregon (blowout, not close)
2011 Oklahoma State (we played a bit conservative on the final drive in a tied game; however, unlike last night, where the defense pretty much had its way with ASU for most of the night, Oklahoma State's offense (more specifically Blackmon) was torching us, and we didn't want to give their quick-strike offense a chance to win in regulation. However, Jordan should make a 35-yard FG, and the overtime miss too further compounds the point. However, this is the closest game I have encountered so far of where conservative playcalling in a game in which we were either leading or tied may have cost us.)
2012 Washington (didn't turtle)
2012 Notre Dame (didn't turtle, give one to the officials on Stepfan TD)
2013 Utah (playing from behind, lost game)
2013 USC (definitely didn't turtle, as Hogan threw a crucial pick, with us driving, that set up SC with a short field at their own 40 in a tied game; Hedari would go on to kick game winning FG in a game we all want to forget; this is Exhibit A with regards to the potential pitfalls of aggressive playcalling, particularly with a young QB; however, this was at least a tied game at the time)
2013 Rose Bowl (didn't turtle; went for 4th and 3 at Michigan State's 36 in third quarter in a tied ballgame; Hogan also very limited later on in game with a bad shoulder injury)
2014 USC (didn't turtle with play call; however, we did punt on 4th and 13 from USC's 32 in a tied game; Williamson had already missed two kicks in the game, including a 26 yarder, and fourth and 10+ is not exactly a great place to be. Shaw didn't have a whole lot of good options. Punts ball, SC drives for game-winning FG)
2014 Notre Dame (Didn't turtle; Wayne Lyons coverage breakdown for ages on 4th and 11 cost us this game)
2014 Arizona State (Blowout, not close game)
2014 Oregon (Blowout, not close game)
2014 Utah (didn't turtle with play call; however, we did punt on 4th and 7 from Utah 34; this one is closer to where you should go for it, particularly given how much both teams struggled to move football. Other than OK State, this may be the best counter-argument so far, and it was still 4th and long in a tied game; and the offense had not looked good at all, in a 7-7 game)
2015 Northwestern (Just lost, and got dominated)
2015 Oregon (Didn't turtle; shoot-out where we fumble two snaps disastrously, costing us the game)
2016 Washington (blowout, not close game)
2016 Washington State (blowout, not close game)
2016 Colorado (didn't turtle; another fumbled snap by Burns, in a game of offensive ineptitude, costs this one)
2017 USC (blowout, not close game)
2017 San Diego State (didn't turtle; Chryst's inability to complete forward passes cost us in this game; but we did attempt throws on 1st and 3rd down prior to SDSU's game winning drive in the fourth quarter with a 17-13 Card lead; 1st down was sack, 3rd down an incomplete pass to Parkinson)
2017 Washington State (didn't turtle; attempted passes on 1st and 3rd downs in 4th quarter with 21-17 Card lead; 1st down pass went for loss of 1 yard, 3rd down completed just short of sticks; WSU drives down for game winning score)
2017 USC (definitely didn't turtle; going for it on 4th and goal; just didn't convert)
2017 TCU (shootout, didn't turtle; went step for step in scoring with high powered Big 12 offense)
2018 Notre Dame (blowout, not close game)
2018 Utah (blowout, not close game, thanks largely to a pick-six that represented a 14 point swing in a 19 point game)

So the best examples that the people opposed to "turtling" could potentially come up with are Oklahoma State 2011, USC 2014 and Utah 2014. And frankly, these aren't that clear-cut examples (i.e. there were no games where we had 10-14 point leads and blew the game and lost). All three of these games were tied. In two of three games, Williamson missed very makeable kicks (26 yards and 35 yards). Furthermore, in two of three games, it was fourth and either long or very long, in no-man's land as far as punting/kicking/going for it.

[d4cohn]

For anyone that feels the need, in spite of a win, to decry Shaw’s running the ball with a 7-point lead late in the 4th, I say this:
1) He will never change. 
2) Would you rather have Mike Leach throwing to Quenton Meeks with 3:33 remaining?  23 seconds into this one: https://youtu.be/g02Vs6aW__8
3) Shaw’s playing not to lose most often results in... not losing. There are many proof points and very few counter-examples.  

You can criticize this year’s play-calling in general and our stubborn running to set up the pass rather than vice-versa.  But when it comes to playing with a lead in the 4th, Shaw’s unemotional decision-making and resistance of the urge to step on throats is actually a strength.

I think Cardinal Sagehen makes some very cogent points. I am going to focus on the potential counter-example games, rather than the proof points, in examining this. 

The breadth of our losses in Shaw era:

2011 Oregon (blowout, not close)
2011 Oklahoma State (we played a bit conservative on the final drive in a tied game; however, unlike last night, where the defense pretty much had its way with ASU for most of the night, Oklahoma State's offense (more specifically Blackmon) was torching us, and we didn't want to give their quick-strike offense a chance to win in regulation. However, Jordan should make a 35-yard FG, and the overtime miss too further compounds the point. However, this is the closest game I have encountered so far of where conservative playcalling in a game in which we were either leading or tied may have cost us.)
2012 Washington (didn't turtle)
2012 Notre Dame (didn't turtle, give one to the officials on Stepfan TD)
2013 Utah (playing from behind, lost game)
2013 USC (definitely didn't turtle, as Hogan threw a crucial pick, with us driving, that set up SC with a short field at their own 40 in a tied game; Hedari would go on to kick game winning FG in a game we all want to forget; this is Exhibit A with regards to the potential pitfalls of aggressive playcalling, particularly with a young QB; however, this was at least a tied game at the time)
2013 Rose Bowl (didn't turtle; went for 4th and 3 at Michigan State's 36 in third quarter in a tied ballgame; Hogan also very limited later on in game with a bad shoulder injury)
2014 USC (didn't turtle with play call; however, we did punt on 4th and 13 from USC's 32 in a tied game; Williamson had already missed two kicks in the game, including a 26 yarder, and fourth and 10+ is not exactly a great place to be. Shaw didn't have a whole lot of good options. Punts ball, SC drives for game-winning FG)
2014 Notre Dame (Didn't turtle; Wayne Lyons coverage breakdown for ages on 4th and 11 cost us this game)
2014 Arizona State (Blowout, not close game)
2014 Oregon (Blowout, not close game)
2014 Utah (didn't turtle with play call; however, we did punt on 4th and 7 from Utah 34; this one is closer to where you should go for it, particularly given how much both teams struggled to move football. Other than OK State, this may be the best counter-argument so far, and it was still 4th and long in a tied game; and the offense had not looked good at all, in a 7-7 game)
2015 Northwestern (Just lost, and got dominated)
2015 Oregon (Didn't turtle; shoot-out where we fumble two snaps disastrously, costing us the game)
2016 Washington (blowout, not close game)
2016 Washington State (blowout, not close game)
2016 Colorado (didn't turtle; another fumbled snap by Burns, in a game of offensive ineptitude, costs this one)
2017 USC (blowout, not close game)
2017 San Diego State (didn't turtle; Chryst's inability to complete forward passes cost us in this game; but we did attempt throws on 1st and 3rd down prior to SDSU's game winning drive in the fourth quarter with a 17-13 Card lead; 1st down was sack, 3rd down an incomplete pass to Parkinson)
2017 Washington State (didn't turtle; attempted passes on 1st and 3rd downs in 4th quarter with 21-17 Card lead; 1st down pass went for loss of 1 yard, 3rd down completed just short of sticks; WSU drives down for game winning score)
2017 USC (definitely didn't turtle; going for it on 4th and goal; just didn't convert)
2017 TCU (shootout, didn't turtle; went step for step in scoring with high powered Big 12 offense)
2018 Notre Dame (blowout, not close game)
2018 Utah (blowout, not close game, thanks largely to a pick-six that represented a 14 point swing in a 19 point game)

So the best examples that the people opposed to "turtling" could potentially come up with are Oklahoma State 2011, USC 2014 and Utah 2014. And frankly, these aren't that clear-cut examples (i.e. there were no games where we had 10-14 point leads and blew the game and lost). All three of these games were tied. In two of three games, Williamson missed very makeable kicks (26 yards and 35 yards). Furthermore, in two of three games, it was fourth and either long or very long, in no-man's land as far as punting/kicking/going for it.

[Spiny_Norman]

I seem to remember reading that David Shaw teams had never lost a lead that they took into the 4th quarter until last year's WSU game. Then of course they did it again in the Alamo Bowl.

[Spiny_Norman]

I seem to remember reading that David Shaw teams had never lost a lead that they took into the 4th quarter until last year's WSU game. Then of course they did it again in the Alamo Bowl.

[d4cohn]

I seem to remember reading that David Shaw teams had never lost a lead that they took into the 4th quarter until last year's WSU game. Then of course they did it again in the Alamo Bowl.

And neither of those games were lost due to "turtling". I know last night may not be the most aesthetically pleasing, or best for all of our nerves, but Coach Shaw, in his 8+ years at Stanford, has never blown a game in which we were leading, and his football equivalent of "parking the bus" offense cost us the game. 

At best, people can point to a couple of decisions in tied ball games, with kickers missing short kicks, and punting on fourth and long around the +35.

[d4cohn]

I seem to remember reading that David Shaw teams had never lost a lead that they took into the 4th quarter until last year's WSU game. Then of course they did it again in the Alamo Bowl.

And neither of those games were lost due to "turtling". I know last night may not be the most aesthetically pleasing, or best for all of our nerves, but Coach Shaw, in his 8+ years at Stanford, has never blown a game in which we were leading, and his football equivalent of "parking the bus" offense cost us the game. 

At best, people can point to a couple of decisions in tied ball games, with kickers missing short kicks, and punting on fourth and long around the +35.