[washingtonismoney]

I love numbers as much as the next Stanford football fan, but y'all are missing context there.  Anyway, I'm a little nervous about this game because Stanford can be had if we get stubborn with the playcalling.

What is there about context? Stanford scored a bunch of points in those games. The goal of the offense is to score points. Insofar as Stanford was stopped from scoring points, it was from fluky turnovers (Oregon) or fluky weather (WSU) rather than quality defense per se.

Ergo, they were effective offensive performances.

Obviously Stanford can be had. I don't think anyone is particularly happy with the margin of error that our defense presents us. Nevertheless, looked in isolation, the performances that you've identified as subpar are neither subpar nor defensively-driven. What am I missing about your argument?

[washingtonismoney]

I love numbers as much as the next Stanford football fan, but y'all are missing context there.  Anyway, I'm a little nervous about this game because Stanford can be had if we get stubborn with the playcalling.

What is there about context? Stanford scored a bunch of points in those games. The goal of the offense is to score points. Insofar as Stanford was stopped from scoring points, it was from fluky turnovers (Oregon) or fluky weather (WSU) rather than quality defense per se.

Ergo, they were effective offensive performances.

Obviously Stanford can be had. I don't think anyone is particularly happy with the margin of error that our defense presents us. Nevertheless, looked in isolation, the performances that you've identified as subpar are neither subpar nor defensively-driven. What am I missing about your argument?