OutsiderFan, you stated that beautifully.
Separately, I categorically reject the charges by WIM and Hank and others who think criticism of play-calling is all 20/20 hindsight bias. That is just wrong. There is NO GOOD ARGUMENT that the play calling against Utah at game's end was sound or smart or good. I will always believe that, and would have still believed it even had Stanford completed the pass on third and 2 to the third string TE in the back of the end zone. (Of course, Utah may still have come back for the winning FG at that point . . .). The same holds, imo, on the second and two call against SC - when Hogan threw the pick. That should have been a running play in that game situation. And yes, it is a fluid situation based on what you see happening on the field at that point in the game. And that is what was so discouraging about those play calls: the only people in the football universe who thought passing in those situations was the right call happened to be on the Stanford sideline. That is pretty darn alarming.
And the flipside is true, too. Harbaugh's "plan" not to take a knee late against ND "worked" because Stanford managed to hold on for the win. But not taking one knee (or even two?) was INDEFENSIBLE. I also think trying the FG against Oregon - you know, the one that was blocked and returned for a TD - was the right call by Shaw. Stanford was 4-4 up to that point, the additional points would have put Stanford up by more than 3 TDs. Thus, even though the result was the absolute worst thing possible, the play call was very defensible.
It's eliminating the indefensible play calls that is the "baby first step" I'm hoping for. We shall see.
Separately, I categorically reject the charges by WIM and Hank and others who think criticism of play-calling is all 20/20 hindsight bias. That is just wrong. There is NO GOOD ARGUMENT that the play calling against Utah at game's end was sound or smart or good. I will always believe that, and would have still believed it even had Stanford completed the pass on third and 2 to the third string TE in the back of the end zone. (Of course, Utah may still have come back for the winning FG at that point . . .). The same holds, imo, on the second and two call against SC - when Hogan threw the pick. That should have been a running play in that game situation. And yes, it is a fluid situation based on what you see happening on the field at that point in the game. And that is what was so discouraging about those play calls: the only people in the football universe who thought passing in those situations was the right call happened to be on the Stanford sideline. That is pretty darn alarming.
And the flipside is true, too. Harbaugh's "plan" not to take a knee late against ND "worked" because Stanford managed to hold on for the win. But not taking one knee (or even two?) was INDEFENSIBLE. I also think trying the FG against Oregon - you know, the one that was blocked and returned for a TD - was the right call by Shaw. Stanford was 4-4 up to that point, the additional points would have put Stanford up by more than 3 TDs. Thus, even though the result was the absolute worst thing possible, the play call was very defensible.
It's eliminating the indefensible play calls that is the "baby first step" I'm hoping for. We shall see.