[stupac2]

After witnessing Stanford's OL open virtually zero holes for runners and be held to 50 yards rushing on 28 attempts (can't believe I'm typing that), and given most of the run attempts were up the middle, the natural question is how much of this was a function of Burkett not playing?

I wasn't paying close attention nor have I re-watched the game to have any idea.  It seems logical that Burkett would have helped open a few more holes or otherwise been able to move some guys more effectively, but I really don't know.

It does seem Burkett will be the starting Center against USC, which should help.  In any case, USC can't be too happy with the fact Stanford's OL is going to be big time challenged by their coaches this week, and will be playing with a real sense of purpose against them.

I have a hard time telling this from the stands (especially while chasing my 2-year-old all over the stadium) but from what other people are saying it sounds more like SDSU decided to play cover 0 pretty much all game, leaving 8, 9, or even 10 men in the box. Hard to run against that. It looked to me like over and over there were holes being opened that were just instantly filled by a safety, had they been playing normally those would've been 5-8 yard gains with the chance for much more.

But, as I said, hard to tell from the stands, and really hard to tell while running back and forth over literally the whole stadium. (Did you know that they park an ambulance just outside the tunnel? I sure do now!)

EDIT: Also, it seemed to me like we did relatively little running out of passing formations and passing out of running formations. I know that we were trying to keep it vanilla, but you can pass out of 22 and run out of 11! Maybe it would've have worked, I dunno, but it was frustrating seeing 10 guys in the box and Love getting stuffed for no gain. Run a sweep or something against that, jeez.

[stupac2]

After witnessing Stanford's OL open virtually zero holes for runners and be held to 50 yards rushing on 28 attempts (can't believe I'm typing that), and given most of the run attempts were up the middle, the natural question is how much of this was a function of Burkett not playing?

I wasn't paying close attention nor have I re-watched the game to have any idea.  It seems logical that Burkett would have helped open a few more holes or otherwise been able to move some guys more effectively, but I really don't know.

It does seem Burkett will be the starting Center against USC, which should help.  In any case, USC can't be too happy with the fact Stanford's OL is going to be big time challenged by their coaches this week, and will be playing with a real sense of purpose against them.

I have a hard time telling this from the stands (especially while chasing my 2-year-old all over the stadium) but from what other people are saying it sounds more like SDSU decided to play cover 0 pretty much all game, leaving 8, 9, or even 10 men in the box. Hard to run against that. It looked to me like over and over there were holes being opened that were just instantly filled by a safety, had they been playing normally those would've been 5-8 yard gains with the chance for much more.

But, as I said, hard to tell from the stands, and really hard to tell while running back and forth over literally the whole stadium. (Did you know that they park an ambulance just outside the tunnel? I sure do now!)

EDIT: Also, it seemed to me like we did relatively little running out of passing formations and passing out of running formations. I know that we were trying to keep it vanilla, but you can pass out of 22 and run out of 11! Maybe it would've have worked, I dunno, but it was frustrating seeing 10 guys in the box and Love getting stuffed for no gain. Run a sweep or something against that, jeez.