[Farm93]

I pointed out yesterday that USC had 2 pass break ups in the entire game (on 23 pass attempts), while Stanford DBs recorded 7 PBUs plus one interception on 40-ish attempts.  The relatively few pass break ups by SC DBs suggests that either the DBs were not good at making plays on the ball or that our receivers were less well-covered than you might think.  I think also the fact that we drew three pass interferences again suggests that the DBs were not in a position to make a play on the ball, and thus had to interfere with the receiver.  Obviously, I can't say if that is because our receivers were gaining physical separation from the DBs, or if they took advantage of their size and strength to shield the ball from the DBs, or if it was a question of the QB placing the ball where only the receiver had a chance to make a play.

I also noted yesterday that while DBs were able to stay close to our outside receivers, we had several plays to the middle of the field where our receivers had plenty of space (Jones, yes, but also Higgins twice on two consecutive plays, the first of which he dropped).  I think the PIs made us more aware of the passes outside, but we had more plays to open receivers in the middle of the field than the discourse suggests.

BC

The DBs from SC were bad.   I am not one to visit their board.  Based on prior experiences listening to post-game call-in shows, while stuck in area traffic trying to get out of there, my assumption is the SC fans are very worried about their level of play.

Stanford does not have the best WRs in the conference, or the most prolific passing attack in the conference.   Even if McKee is amazing, Luck and Hogan were rarely putting up crazy passing games against top 30 level teams.   So if USC's DBs struggled against Stanford's WRs, what will they do against Utah, Arizona State and UCLA.

I suspect the SC fans have started to realize that their team is not going to get them into a CFP Championship game against Alabama.

[Farm93]

I pointed out yesterday that USC had 2 pass break ups in the entire game (on 23 pass attempts), while Stanford DBs recorded 7 PBUs plus one interception on 40-ish attempts.  The relatively few pass break ups by SC DBs suggests that either the DBs were not good at making plays on the ball or that our receivers were less well-covered than you might think.  I think also the fact that we drew three pass interferences again suggests that the DBs were not in a position to make a play on the ball, and thus had to interfere with the receiver.  Obviously, I can't say if that is because our receivers were gaining physical separation from the DBs, or if they took advantage of their size and strength to shield the ball from the DBs, or if it was a question of the QB placing the ball where only the receiver had a chance to make a play.

I also noted yesterday that while DBs were able to stay close to our outside receivers, we had several plays to the middle of the field where our receivers had plenty of space (Jones, yes, but also Higgins twice on two consecutive plays, the first of which he dropped).  I think the PIs made us more aware of the passes outside, but we had more plays to open receivers in the middle of the field than the discourse suggests.

BC

The DBs from SC were bad.   I am not one to visit their board.  Based on prior experiences listening to post-game call-in shows, while stuck in area traffic trying to get out of there, my assumption is the SC fans are very worried about their level of play.

Stanford does not have the best WRs in the conference, or the most prolific passing attack in the conference.   Even if McKee is amazing, Luck and Hogan were rarely putting up crazy passing games against top 30 level teams.   So if USC's DBs struggled against Stanford's WRs, what will they do against Utah, Arizona State and UCLA.

I suspect the SC fans have started to realize that their team is not going to get them into a CFP Championship game against Alabama.