[lex24]

1. Great game from o-line. KJ had a lot of time to throw. Which enabled him to find second/third receiver at times.

2. KJ. I think his thumb still bothering him is a lot of his passes were on the wobbly side. But he played a hell of a game. Good decisions made some nice throws found secondary receivers and he does seem to be a pretty damn good leader.

3. Adebo. 2 big picks. Especially first. He breaks well and closes fast. I doubt NFL scouts are bothered by the fact that he’s been beat a few times this year. You can’t play that position and not get beat.

4. Wedington/Fehoko. I thought both had their best games as a cardinal.

5. Sanborn. Perfect on his place kicks. Good job kicking off and a couple of plants inside the 20. A really good game for a guy pressed into extra duty

[lex24]

1. Great game from o-line. KJ had a lot of time to throw. Which enabled him to find second/third receiver at times.

2. KJ. I think his thumb still bothering him is a lot of his passes were on the wobbly side. But he played a hell of a game. Good decisions made some nice throws found secondary receivers and he does seem to be a pretty damn good leader.

3. Adebo. 2 big picks. Especially first. He breaks well and closes fast. I doubt NFL scouts are bothered by the fact that he’s been beat a few times this year. You can’t play that position and not get beat.

4. Wedington/Fehoko. I thought both had their best games as a cardinal.

5. Sanborn. Perfect on his place kicks. Good job kicking off and a couple of plants inside the 20. A really good game for a guy pressed into extra duty

[martyup]

Costello was not sacked.  Last week West was sacked 7 times.  Same O line.

---

Not one post on the game thread by the Cardboard Shaw Critic Club (CSCC).  That is progress.

[martyup]

Costello was not sacked.  Last week West was sacked 7 times.  Same O line.

---

Not one post on the game thread by the Cardboard Shaw Critic Club (CSCC).  That is progress.

[Spiny_Norman]

Only 2 penalties on the team - pass interference and illegal forward pass when Costello tried to throw a 2nd time after catching a tipped pass. Very clean game on both sides of the ball.

[Spiny_Norman]

Only 2 penalties on the team - pass interference and illegal forward pass when Costello tried to throw a 2nd time after catching a tipped pass. Very clean game on both sides of the ball.

[chrisk]

Stanford moves up to 2md place in North (Stanford has tie breaker with OSU).

UCLA is dominating ASU and would move up to 3rd in the South.

The crazy Pac-12 is starting to sort itself out. Stanford's chances for a bowl game are not as bleak as we might have thought. Stanford could slot themselves into another return visit to El Paso, but Las Vegas and Tucson are also possible.

[chrisk]

Stanford moves up to 2md place in North (Stanford has tie breaker with OSU).

UCLA is dominating ASU and would move up to 3rd in the South.

The crazy Pac-12 is starting to sort itself out. Stanford's chances for a bowl game are not as bleak as we might have thought. Stanford could slot themselves into another return visit to El Paso, but Las Vegas and Tucson are also possible.

[winflop]

Hot Take: I am looking forward to seeing Stanford win Big Game to become bowl eligible while eliminating the Weenies from bowl eligibility.

[winflop]

Hot Take: I am looking forward to seeing Stanford win Big Game to become bowl eligible while eliminating the Weenies from bowl eligibility.

[VFRing98]

My kids had soccer games all day today and couldn’t watch football.

No causation by correlation or anything but if this is how they play when I don’t watch, I’ll take one for the team and stay away.

[VFRing98]

My kids had soccer games all day today and couldn’t watch football.

No causation by correlation or anything but if this is how they play when I don’t watch, I’ll take one for the team and stay away.

[M T]

Only 2 penalties on the team - pass interference and illegal forward pass when Costello tried to throw a 2nd time after catching a tipped pass. Very clean game on both sides of the ball.

Should that have been targeting (against Arizona) when Adebo got hit after making the (first) interception?
Has Stanford gotten the refs mad at them, so they only call targeting against Stanford players, not when they are targeted?
It has seemed that way for a few years now....

[M T]

Only 2 penalties on the team - pass interference and illegal forward pass when Costello tried to throw a 2nd time after catching a tipped pass. Very clean game on both sides of the ball.

Should that have been targeting (against Arizona) when Adebo got hit after making the (first) interception?
Has Stanford gotten the refs mad at them, so they only call targeting against Stanford players, not when they are targeted?
It has seemed that way for a few years now....

[martyup]

Only 2 penalties on the team - pass interference and illegal forward pass when Costello tried to throw a 2nd time after catching a tipped pass. Very clean game on both sides of the ball.

Should that have been targeting (against Arizona) when Adebo got hit after making the (first) interception?
Has Stanford gotten the refs mad at them, so they only call targeting against Stanford players, not when they are targeted?
It has seemed that way for a few years now....

I saw that too.  The announcers didn't even notice.

[martyup]

Only 2 penalties on the team - pass interference and illegal forward pass when Costello tried to throw a 2nd time after catching a tipped pass. Very clean game on both sides of the ball.

Should that have been targeting (against Arizona) when Adebo got hit after making the (first) interception?
Has Stanford gotten the refs mad at them, so they only call targeting against Stanford players, not when they are targeted?
It has seemed that way for a few years now....

I saw that too.  The announcers didn't even notice.

[BostonCard]

31 points given up is not a great look for the defense, and it’s performance will be overshadowed by the 41 points scored by the offense...

But after Arizona scored on its opening possession of the second half, they went: punt, punt, interception, turnover on downs, interception.  That’s quite the turnaround for the D.  31 points given up in the first 36 minutes of the game; 0 in the last 24.

BC

[BostonCard]

31 points given up is not a great look for the defense, and it’s performance will be overshadowed by the 41 points scored by the offense...

But after Arizona scored on its opening possession of the second half, they went: punt, punt, interception, turnover on downs, interception.  That’s quite the turnaround for the D.  31 points given up in the first 36 minutes of the game; 0 in the last 24.

BC

[OutsiderFan]

Most people won’t see it, but Stanford isn’t very far from being undefeated, even 6-2 would be reasonable in most years at his point, and none of its wins come with the asterisks the losses do.

Most programs in P5 aren’t foolish enough to schedule effectively three power 5 teams OOC in one season. Stanford never would have scheduled UCF. If that is say North Texas, like Cal had, Stanford wins that game and if Costello or Mills plays against UCLA, Stanford wins that game. If Costello was healthy against Oregon, Stanford has a real shot at a W there, and they led USC 17-3 before imploding, so anything from 6-2 to 8-0 was possible with a normal schedule and less comically injured team.

Still, this team is wildly inconsistent, not just from game to game, but in halves and quarters. They play very well and horrible in the same games. I understand Arizona does not have a great defense, but Stanford put up one TD at home in its first two games. Stanford scored four in one half yesterday. Stanford basically shutout the Beavers for nearly three quarters and then gave up 3 4th quarter TDs. 

All that said, these things still happened and the record is 4-4. Colorado is the most important game on the schedule now if you care about bowl games and Shaw not suffering his first losing season. I can’t fathom Stanford beating WSU or Notre Dame. Mike Leach owns David Shaw, and Notre Dame is way better than Stanford at the LOS.

[OutsiderFan]

Most people won’t see it, but Stanford isn’t very far from being undefeated, even 6-2 would be reasonable in most years at his point, and none of its wins come with the asterisks the losses do.

Most programs in P5 aren’t foolish enough to schedule effectively three power 5 teams OOC in one season. Stanford never would have scheduled UCF. If that is say North Texas, like Cal had, Stanford wins that game and if Costello or Mills plays against UCLA, Stanford wins that game. If Costello was healthy against Oregon, Stanford has a real shot at a W there, and they led USC 17-3 before imploding, so anything from 6-2 to 8-0 was possible with a normal schedule and less comically injured team.

Still, this team is wildly inconsistent, not just from game to game, but in halves and quarters. They play very well and horrible in the same games. I understand Arizona does not have a great defense, but Stanford put up one TD at home in its first two games. Stanford scored four in one half yesterday. Stanford basically shutout the Beavers for nearly three quarters and then gave up 3 4th quarter TDs. 

All that said, these things still happened and the record is 4-4. Colorado is the most important game on the schedule now if you care about bowl games and Shaw not suffering his first losing season. I can’t fathom Stanford beating WSU or Notre Dame. Mike Leach owns David Shaw, and Notre Dame is way better than Stanford at the LOS.

[Phogge]

Biggest hole is ILB. Except for Washington and feeble Northwestern ILB play has been poor to awful. Lots of work in 2020 Spring and Fall camp needed. Concept, reads, tackling technique all need great improvement.

[Phogge]

Biggest hole is ILB. Except for Washington and feeble Northwestern ILB play has been poor to awful. Lots of work in 2020 Spring and Fall camp needed. Concept, reads, tackling technique all need great improvement.

[Goose]

 I can’t fathom Stanford beating WSU or Notre Dame. Mike Leach owns David Shaw, and Notre Dame is way better than Stanford at the LOS.

Believe it or not, I think we have a shot at WSU. They aren't as good as they have been, particularly on defense. Like it or not, Leach throwing them under the bus has at least temporarily re-invigorated their defense. I don't think that will last, and that can be the difference. If we have an efficient offense most of the game, we can grind them down. That doesn't mean run all the time. It means playing like we did against UW. As you say, we are inconsistent. If the "good" Stanford shows up, the game can be a lot like the Arizona game. Our corners are good enough to be effective. We just need to not get gashed too badly elsewhere.

[Goose]

 I can’t fathom Stanford beating WSU or Notre Dame. Mike Leach owns David Shaw, and Notre Dame is way better than Stanford at the LOS.

Believe it or not, I think we have a shot at WSU. They aren't as good as they have been, particularly on defense. Like it or not, Leach throwing them under the bus has at least temporarily re-invigorated their defense. I don't think that will last, and that can be the difference. If we have an efficient offense most of the game, we can grind them down. That doesn't mean run all the time. It means playing like we did against UW. As you say, we are inconsistent. If the "good" Stanford shows up, the game can be a lot like the Arizona game. Our corners are good enough to be effective. We just need to not get gashed too badly elsewhere.

[Mick]

I can’t fathom Stanford beating WSU or Notre Dame. Mike Leach owns David Shaw, and Notre Dame is way better than Stanford at the LOS.

#8 Notre Dame just saved Jim Harbaugh's job by losing 45-14 to Michigan.  Michigan's defense held Notre Dame to about 300 yards less than their average offensive output.

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/colum...477694001/

[Mick]

I can’t fathom Stanford beating WSU or Notre Dame. Mike Leach owns David Shaw, and Notre Dame is way better than Stanford at the LOS.

#8 Notre Dame just saved Jim Harbaugh's job by losing 45-14 to Michigan.  Michigan's defense held Notre Dame to about 300 yards less than their average offensive output.

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/colum...477694001/

[JohnR34231]

Shaw's overall record against Leach is 4-3, so to say Leach owns him is just considering the last three years. The last two losses to the Cougs have been by a total of 6 points.
So while I wouldn't bet on a victory in Pullman, I don't think it is out of the question.

[JohnR34231]

Shaw's overall record against Leach is 4-3, so to say Leach owns him is just considering the last three years. The last two losses to the Cougs have been by a total of 6 points.
So while I wouldn't bet on a victory in Pullman, I don't think it is out of the question.

[2006alum]

Shaw's overall record against Leach is 4-3, so to say Leach owns him is just considering the last three years. The last two losses to the Cougs have been by a total of 6 points.
So while I wouldn't bet on a victory in Pullman, I don't think it is out of the question.

Another option is just not to feed the glass-half-empty board trolls. We owned UCLA until suddenly we didn't. To paraphrase the philosophy of both some members of this board and also Ariana Grande, "thank u, next."

[2006alum]

Shaw's overall record against Leach is 4-3, so to say Leach owns him is just considering the last three years. The last two losses to the Cougs have been by a total of 6 points.
So while I wouldn't bet on a victory in Pullman, I don't think it is out of the question.

Another option is just not to feed the glass-half-empty board trolls. We owned UCLA until suddenly we didn't. To paraphrase the philosophy of both some members of this board and also Ariana Grande, "thank u, next."

[OutsiderFan]

There is a lot of middle ground and gray area when it comes to coaching criticism. Many legitimate reasons exist to question the direction of the Stanford football program right now.  Effectively adopting a "we beat  (a terrible) Arizona" somehow means Stanford's football coaches are above being questioned, is just silly.

The "glass-half empty board trolls" designation suggests people who question shouldn't be taken seriously and only those who don't can be taken seriously. Nonsense.

[OutsiderFan]

There is a lot of middle ground and gray area when it comes to coaching criticism. Many legitimate reasons exist to question the direction of the Stanford football program right now.  Effectively adopting a "we beat  (a terrible) Arizona" somehow means Stanford's football coaches are above being questioned, is just silly.

The "glass-half empty board trolls" designation suggests people who question shouldn't be taken seriously and only those who don't can be taken seriously. Nonsense.

[2006alum]

There is a lot of middle ground and gray area when it comes to coaching criticism. Many legitimate reasons exist to question the direction of the Stanford football program right now.  Effectively adopting a "we beat  (a terrible) Arizona" somehow means Stanford's football coaches are above being questioned, is just silly.

The "glass-half empty board trolls" designation suggests people who question shouldn't be taken seriously and only those who don't can be taken seriously. Nonsense.

With all due respect, I don't think I see much "gray area" when it comes to your views about our team. Here's a few highlights from recent weeks:

When Oregon scored on a busted coverage TD pass to make it 21-3 in the 4th Quarter, I left the stadium, and walked to the ticket office, where I had just spent $100 about 3.5 hours prior, for the privilege of being in Stanford Stadium - 2/3 full with 2/3 of attendees Duck fans - with my college buddy. I asked for a refund.

That was the most awful football game I’ve ever paid money to see in person. . . .

David Shaw needs to understand football is an entertainment business. Several people around me left at half time, citing the boring football being played. Everything Shaw controls is at a glacial pace. Recruiting, changing coaches, barely getting plays off in time, the slow developing nature of so much of what the offense does. Slow and boring is not how you win fans. . . .

Shaw needs an intervention, absolutely must step down as OC and hire someone else to do the job. Every team in the PAC-12 has a better offense than Stanford now, including Cal and Oregon State who will likely beat Stanford next week. I saw David Shaw’s post game presser and see a guy who can’t see the forest through the trees. He sees a team that hasn’t played its best. I see a team being poorly coached.

As I've already expressed elsewhere, in my view, a true fan of Stanford football doesn't demand a refund because of one bad game against a top 10 team. That, to me, is not the "middle ground approach."

Mike Leach owns David Shaw

As someone else pointed out, Shaw is 4-3 vs. Leach all time. Again, not much gray area as articulated.

Thanks to Larry, I couldn’t see the game. But I can see the stats. Stanford really had no business winning based on what I can gather. Stanford continues to be a very poorly coached team that eked out a victory against the least talented roster in the PAC-12.

"Continues to be a very poorly coached team" does not seem like gray area.

Plus, there's this whole thread that was started and whose purpose was essentially to point out how mediocre Stanford football is this season.

I am not first and foremost a Stanford football fan - I'm a Stanford alum first, a Stanford sports fan second, and a Stanford football fan a distant third. David Shaw has done more good for Stanford University than just about any alum in the past decade, and I've grown tired of exaggerated efforts to find fault with him at every turn. Our football players have almost entirely avoided the recent tendency for college football players to show up in the news for stealing, cheating, taking fake classes, getting improper benefits from boosters, driving drunk, or being accused of domestic violence or sexual assault. Our graduation rate is nearly unmatched. Our alums in the NFL seem to be providing weekly highlight reels. I've been to four Stanford men's and women's basketball games in the past 2 years; I saw David Shaw at two of the four of them, and he very kindly took time to take picture with me and a friend at one of them. And we've won more Rose Bowls during that stretch than in the prior 4 decades combined. 

As a very proud member of the Stanford community, I couldn't be prouder of how he and his players uphold what I consider to be Stanford values. And they've won a ton of football games along the way. And that said, I think there's plenty of reason to criticize aspects of the football team this year - players, coaches, trainers, the whole lot. But if you continually put members of my alma mater "on blast," eventually I'm going to do the same in turn. I'm totally game for measured criticism, but I'm waiting to see the measured part. Just my (admittedly salty) two cents.

[2006alum]

There is a lot of middle ground and gray area when it comes to coaching criticism. Many legitimate reasons exist to question the direction of the Stanford football program right now.  Effectively adopting a "we beat  (a terrible) Arizona" somehow means Stanford's football coaches are above being questioned, is just silly.

The "glass-half empty board trolls" designation suggests people who question shouldn't be taken seriously and only those who don't can be taken seriously. Nonsense.

With all due respect, I don't think I see much "gray area" when it comes to your views about our team. Here's a few highlights from recent weeks:

When Oregon scored on a busted coverage TD pass to make it 21-3 in the 4th Quarter, I left the stadium, and walked to the ticket office, where I had just spent $100 about 3.5 hours prior, for the privilege of being in Stanford Stadium - 2/3 full with 2/3 of attendees Duck fans - with my college buddy. I asked for a refund.

That was the most awful football game I’ve ever paid money to see in person. . . .

David Shaw needs to understand football is an entertainment business. Several people around me left at half time, citing the boring football being played. Everything Shaw controls is at a glacial pace. Recruiting, changing coaches, barely getting plays off in time, the slow developing nature of so much of what the offense does. Slow and boring is not how you win fans. . . .

Shaw needs an intervention, absolutely must step down as OC and hire someone else to do the job. Every team in the PAC-12 has a better offense than Stanford now, including Cal and Oregon State who will likely beat Stanford next week. I saw David Shaw’s post game presser and see a guy who can’t see the forest through the trees. He sees a team that hasn’t played its best. I see a team being poorly coached.

As I've already expressed elsewhere, in my view, a true fan of Stanford football doesn't demand a refund because of one bad game against a top 10 team. That, to me, is not the "middle ground approach."

Mike Leach owns David Shaw

As someone else pointed out, Shaw is 4-3 vs. Leach all time. Again, not much gray area as articulated.

Thanks to Larry, I couldn’t see the game. But I can see the stats. Stanford really had no business winning based on what I can gather. Stanford continues to be a very poorly coached team that eked out a victory against the least talented roster in the PAC-12.

"Continues to be a very poorly coached team" does not seem like gray area.

Plus, there's this whole thread that was started and whose purpose was essentially to point out how mediocre Stanford football is this season.

I am not first and foremost a Stanford football fan - I'm a Stanford alum first, a Stanford sports fan second, and a Stanford football fan a distant third. David Shaw has done more good for Stanford University than just about any alum in the past decade, and I've grown tired of exaggerated efforts to find fault with him at every turn. Our football players have almost entirely avoided the recent tendency for college football players to show up in the news for stealing, cheating, taking fake classes, getting improper benefits from boosters, driving drunk, or being accused of domestic violence or sexual assault. Our graduation rate is nearly unmatched. Our alums in the NFL seem to be providing weekly highlight reels. I've been to four Stanford men's and women's basketball games in the past 2 years; I saw David Shaw at two of the four of them, and he very kindly took time to take picture with me and a friend at one of them. And we've won more Rose Bowls during that stretch than in the prior 4 decades combined. 

As a very proud member of the Stanford community, I couldn't be prouder of how he and his players uphold what I consider to be Stanford values. And they've won a ton of football games along the way. And that said, I think there's plenty of reason to criticize aspects of the football team this year - players, coaches, trainers, the whole lot. But if you continually put members of my alma mater "on blast," eventually I'm going to do the same in turn. I'm totally game for measured criticism, but I'm waiting to see the measured part. Just my (admittedly salty) two cents.

[martyup]

[martyup]

[cardcrimson]

Another option is just not to feed the glass-half-empty board trolls. We owned UCLA until suddenly we didn't. To paraphrase the philosophy of both some members of this board and also Ariana Grande, "thank u, next."
[/quote]

I guess I'm in the glass half full group. I like our program and Shaw as it's leader. There's half a glass. I wish we had a stronger strength and conditioning program, a stronger recruiting effort (unfilled scholies is mind boggling), and some out of the box thinking on offense (our offense in the early half of this decade was original for this day and age, though a throwback to a generation ago). That's the missing half.

[cardcrimson]

Another option is just not to feed the glass-half-empty board trolls. We owned UCLA until suddenly we didn't. To paraphrase the philosophy of both some members of this board and also Ariana Grande, "thank u, next."
[/quote]

I guess I'm in the glass half full group. I like our program and Shaw as it's leader. There's half a glass. I wish we had a stronger strength and conditioning program, a stronger recruiting effort (unfilled scholies is mind boggling), and some out of the box thinking on offense (our offense in the early half of this decade was original for this day and age, though a throwback to a generation ago). That's the missing half.

[jonnyss]

i think shaw's doing much better in games this year.
pretty good variety in the play-calling. added screens a bit ago. added crossing patterns and multiple fly patterns this week. only occasionally predictable. mostly getting plays in on time. goes for it on 4th down. few punts from the opponent's 40. using several of the talented freshmen.
still occasionally turtles, but much less often.
and he has to get some of the credit for calling plays that the 3 freshmen o-linemen know how to block.

[jonnyss]

i think shaw's doing much better in games this year.
pretty good variety in the play-calling. added screens a bit ago. added crossing patterns and multiple fly patterns this week. only occasionally predictable. mostly getting plays in on time. goes for it on 4th down. few punts from the opponent's 40. using several of the talented freshmen.
still occasionally turtles, but much less often.
and he has to get some of the credit for calling plays that the 3 freshmen o-linemen know how to block.