[msqueri]

According to the box score running backs had 5 carries for 9 yards. Taylor has given up on this bunch. Is Filkins still injured?

Taylor has indeed given up on this bunch, though it's been that way for a while. RB carries by game:

Hawaii - 19
USC - 15
Sacramento State - 26
Arizona - 11
Oregon - 19
Colorado - 8
UCLA - 7 
Washington - 12
Washington State - 4
Oregon State - 5

Running backs are excluded from the operation of the offense to a very startling degree. I think it's pretty clear, as you say, that Taylor has given up on this bunch. It may be because he doesn't trust them, because he doesn't trust their availability and reliability (and, indeed, Filkins has again shown himself to not be reliably available), because he wants to focus on the future-looking aspects of the offense, because his version of training wheels/running out the clock on this season prioritizes QB runs, because he thinks young and inexperienced linemen are better suited to pass blocking than run blocking, or some combination. Almost certainly some combination. Whatever the cause, we know RBs are not a prioritized part of this team. 

It will be very interesting next season when the room almost entirely turns over, with what I expect to be several cases of attrition and several new scholarship backs. Just like Ayomanor, Bachmeier, and now Harris as new receiving weapons has been one of the most interesting stories of this season, I suspect Davis, Tabb, and Ford vying for carries will be one of the most interesting stories next season. On paper our RB class does not look standout, but they're credible enough for it to be pretty intriguing. 

The big question for the team in this regard, though, will be whether we can expect run blocking to improve next season. Too early to opine on that until we know who is back, particularly Rogers.

---

Yeah, we are tough to predict this year.
We come within a few bounces of the ball of defeating the #5 team in the nation, and then we beat a team on their home field that we had compiled a six game losing streak to.
So maybe we have started to turn the corner, right?
Nope, we get curb stomped by a very good team, but certainly not better than the #5 team (I guess we will find out next week).
So how will we do against Kal? Who knows?

Actually, on paper playing at Oregon State is tougher than playing Washington at home. Heading into yesterday Sagarin would have expected Stanford to lose to Washington by 19.5 in Palo Alto and to lose to Oregon State by 19.99 in Corvallis. Essentially equal challenges, but the Beavers slightly tougher. If this is counter-intuitive to you, in addition to factoring in home field advantage keep in mind that in reality Washington is definitely not the fifth best team in the nation. Heading into the weekend, Sagarin says #14, FEI says #9, and SP+ says #9.

---

In terms of how we will do against Cal, I don't think it's that mysterious how we are likely to do. With the normal caveat of how things can go lots of ways on any given Saturday, this Stanford team has been mostly execrable against the very good teams, but at teams below that level we have been much more consistent. We have played four teams that are legitimate Power Five teams but not what I'd characterize as very good (the top 20 kind of teams) and in those games we've lost by 1 (Arizona), won by 3 (Colorado), lost by 35 (UCLA), and won by 3 (Washington State). There is of course the possibility we will lay a stinker like we did against UCLA, but Cal is a much worse/less stressful of an opponent. Cal is most comparable, actually, to Colorado and Washington State, both of which we beat. I think Cal should be very nervous to play us. We should be very live dogs in this one and it is likely to be a very close game.

---

Yeah, we are tough to predict this year.
We come within a few bounces of the ball of defeating the #5 team in the nation, and then we beat a team on their home field that we had compiled a six game losing streak to.
So maybe we have started to turn the corner, right?
Nope, we get curb stomped by a very good team, but certainly not better than the #5 team (I guess we will find out next week).
So how will we do against Kal? Who knows?

IMO the "key" to next week is whether Ott is injured or not. If he is "full go", Stanford is in a lot of trouble. If Kal can run and we cannot, our offense simply isn't good enough to beat them. Of course, Wilcox could do something stupid and not utilize Ott aggressively :-).

We are definitely good enough to beat Cal. That doesn't mean we necessarily will but Cal is super mediocre. Their only Pac-12 wins are beating cellar dweller Arizona State by 3 at Cal and beating free falling (six straight losses) Washington State by 3 at Cal. I'd probably favor Cal barely in close to a pick 'em for the Big Game. This is two pretty crappy teams by Power Five standards. We have a very solid shot.

[msqueri]

According to the box score running backs had 5 carries for 9 yards. Taylor has given up on this bunch. Is Filkins still injured?

Taylor has indeed given up on this bunch, though it's been that way for a while. RB carries by game:

Hawaii - 19
USC - 15
Sacramento State - 26
Arizona - 11
Oregon - 19
Colorado - 8
UCLA - 7 
Washington - 12
Washington State - 4
Oregon State - 5

Running backs are excluded from the operation of the offense to a very startling degree. I think it's pretty clear, as you say, that Taylor has given up on this bunch. It may be because he doesn't trust them, because he doesn't trust their availability and reliability (and, indeed, Filkins has again shown himself to not be reliably available), because he wants to focus on the future-looking aspects of the offense, because his version of training wheels/running out the clock on this season prioritizes QB runs, because he thinks young and inexperienced linemen are better suited to pass blocking than run blocking, or some combination. Almost certainly some combination. Whatever the cause, we know RBs are not a prioritized part of this team. 

It will be very interesting next season when the room almost entirely turns over, with what I expect to be several cases of attrition and several new scholarship backs. Just like Ayomanor, Bachmeier, and now Harris as new receiving weapons has been one of the most interesting stories of this season, I suspect Davis, Tabb, and Ford vying for carries will be one of the most interesting stories next season. On paper our RB class does not look standout, but they're credible enough for it to be pretty intriguing. 

The big question for the team in this regard, though, will be whether we can expect run blocking to improve next season. Too early to opine on that until we know who is back, particularly Rogers.

---

Yeah, we are tough to predict this year.
We come within a few bounces of the ball of defeating the #5 team in the nation, and then we beat a team on their home field that we had compiled a six game losing streak to.
So maybe we have started to turn the corner, right?
Nope, we get curb stomped by a very good team, but certainly not better than the #5 team (I guess we will find out next week).
So how will we do against Kal? Who knows?

Actually, on paper playing at Oregon State is tougher than playing Washington at home. Heading into yesterday Sagarin would have expected Stanford to lose to Washington by 19.5 in Palo Alto and to lose to Oregon State by 19.99 in Corvallis. Essentially equal challenges, but the Beavers slightly tougher. If this is counter-intuitive to you, in addition to factoring in home field advantage keep in mind that in reality Washington is definitely not the fifth best team in the nation. Heading into the weekend, Sagarin says #14, FEI says #9, and SP+ says #9.

---

In terms of how we will do against Cal, I don't think it's that mysterious how we are likely to do. With the normal caveat of how things can go lots of ways on any given Saturday, this Stanford team has been mostly execrable against the very good teams, but at teams below that level we have been much more consistent. We have played four teams that are legitimate Power Five teams but not what I'd characterize as very good (the top 20 kind of teams) and in those games we've lost by 1 (Arizona), won by 3 (Colorado), lost by 35 (UCLA), and won by 3 (Washington State). There is of course the possibility we will lay a stinker like we did against UCLA, but Cal is a much worse/less stressful of an opponent. Cal is most comparable, actually, to Colorado and Washington State, both of which we beat. I think Cal should be very nervous to play us. We should be very live dogs in this one and it is likely to be a very close game.

---

Yeah, we are tough to predict this year.
We come within a few bounces of the ball of defeating the #5 team in the nation, and then we beat a team on their home field that we had compiled a six game losing streak to.
So maybe we have started to turn the corner, right?
Nope, we get curb stomped by a very good team, but certainly not better than the #5 team (I guess we will find out next week).
So how will we do against Kal? Who knows?

IMO the "key" to next week is whether Ott is injured or not. If he is "full go", Stanford is in a lot of trouble. If Kal can run and we cannot, our offense simply isn't good enough to beat them. Of course, Wilcox could do something stupid and not utilize Ott aggressively :-).

We are definitely good enough to beat Cal. That doesn't mean we necessarily will but Cal is super mediocre. Their only Pac-12 wins are beating cellar dweller Arizona State by 3 at Cal and beating free falling (six straight losses) Washington State by 3 at Cal. I'd probably favor Cal barely in close to a pick 'em for the Big Game. This is two pretty crappy teams by Power Five standards. We have a very solid shot.