[CardinalSagehen]

They will have to get a frosh or ??? ready.

It's a particularly unfortunate time to get a frosh ready because they'd play in 5 games, just enough to burn their shirt.  But it seems like we might have to do that, because Filkins seems to me to be out for an extended period.

It doesn't help anymore to preserve the redshirt year because (a) the player might grad transfer out anyway and (b) they might get injured in another season (as happened with Wilson last year, for example.)

[CardinalSagehen]

They will have to get a frosh or ??? ready.

It's a particularly unfortunate time to get a frosh ready because they'd play in 5 games, just enough to burn their shirt.  But it seems like we might have to do that, because Filkins seems to me to be out for an extended period.

It doesn't help anymore to preserve the redshirt year because (a) the player might grad transfer out anyway and (b) they might get injured in another season (as happened with Wilson last year, for example.)

[Spiny_Norman]

I think we have a winner.

[twitter]https://twitter.com/weber_virginia/status/1583963427633999872[/twitter]

[Spiny_Norman]

I think we have a winner.

[twitter]https://twitter.com/weber_virginia/status/1583963427633999872[/twitter]

[Goose]

They certainly should be scoring more.  But they lack speed.

Amen! We hear all the time about how deep and talented Stanford's receivers are. They are talented. They are big, both tall and strong. They are also not fast. For quite a few years Stanford has relied on having a QB that was accurate enough to put the ball where his receiver could catch it but the defender could not. That mattered, because the defender would be right there. Stanford can get separation only on plays that involve running the defenders across the entire field and creating confusion in the coverage. Otherwise, it is hope our big athletic receivers can out-fight the defenders for the ball. We also run a lot of plays where the receiver shields the catch from the defender with his body. We can do that because our receivers (usually) can withstand the hit.

This is not a sustainable situation. The defenses have figured it out and can mess it up. They know what we want to do and they know nobody is going to just blow by them. That is why Simi Fehoko made such a difference when he was at Stanford. He forced the defense to cover him deep. Even when they did, he could often run by them. At worst, he created space for our other receivers to get open. We mostly haven't had that kind of speed for a while, and it shows.

[Goose]

They certainly should be scoring more.  But they lack speed.

Amen! We hear all the time about how deep and talented Stanford's receivers are. They are talented. They are big, both tall and strong. They are also not fast. For quite a few years Stanford has relied on having a QB that was accurate enough to put the ball where his receiver could catch it but the defender could not. That mattered, because the defender would be right there. Stanford can get separation only on plays that involve running the defenders across the entire field and creating confusion in the coverage. Otherwise, it is hope our big athletic receivers can out-fight the defenders for the ball. We also run a lot of plays where the receiver shields the catch from the defender with his body. We can do that because our receivers (usually) can withstand the hit.

This is not a sustainable situation. The defenses have figured it out and can mess it up. They know what we want to do and they know nobody is going to just blow by them. That is why Simi Fehoko made such a difference when he was at Stanford. He forced the defense to cover him deep. Even when they did, he could often run by them. At worst, he created space for our other receivers to get open. We mostly haven't had that kind of speed for a while, and it shows.

[newguy]

I think we have a winner.

[twitter]https://twitter.com/weber_virginia/status/1583963427633999872[/twitter]

Now why didn't I think of that?

[newguy]

I think we have a winner.

[twitter]https://twitter.com/weber_virginia/status/1583963427633999872[/twitter]

Now why didn't I think of that?

[old spanish trail]

They certainly should be scoring more.  But they lack speed.

Amen! We hear all the time about how deep and talented Stanford's receivers are. They are talented. They are big, both tall and strong. They are also not fast. For quite a few years Stanford has relied on having a QB that was accurate enough to put the ball where his receiver could catch it but the defender could not. That mattered, because the defender would be right there. Stanford can get separation only on plays that involve running the defenders across the entire field and creating confusion in the coverage. Otherwise, it is hope our big athletic receivers can out-fight the defenders for the ball. We also run a lot of plays where the receiver shields the catch from the defender with his body. We can do that because our receivers (usually) can withstand the hit.

This is not a sustainable situation. The defenses have figured it out and can mess it up. They know what we want to do and they know nobody is going to just blow by them. That is why Simi Fehoko made such a difference when he was at Stanford. He forced the defense to cover him deep. Even when they did, he could often run by them. At worst, he created space for our other receivers to get open. We mostly haven't had that kind of speed for a while, and it shows.

Amen. Wilson was faster than the rest and Higgins is very fast, especially for his size, but we don't run go routes, etc. for him for some reason. The rest are strong and big, but generally easy to cover on simple routes.

[old spanish trail]

They certainly should be scoring more.  But they lack speed.

Amen! We hear all the time about how deep and talented Stanford's receivers are. They are talented. They are big, both tall and strong. They are also not fast. For quite a few years Stanford has relied on having a QB that was accurate enough to put the ball where his receiver could catch it but the defender could not. That mattered, because the defender would be right there. Stanford can get separation only on plays that involve running the defenders across the entire field and creating confusion in the coverage. Otherwise, it is hope our big athletic receivers can out-fight the defenders for the ball. We also run a lot of plays where the receiver shields the catch from the defender with his body. We can do that because our receivers (usually) can withstand the hit.

This is not a sustainable situation. The defenses have figured it out and can mess it up. They know what we want to do and they know nobody is going to just blow by them. That is why Simi Fehoko made such a difference when he was at Stanford. He forced the defense to cover him deep. Even when they did, he could often run by them. At worst, he created space for our other receivers to get open. We mostly haven't had that kind of speed for a while, and it shows.

Amen. Wilson was faster than the rest and Higgins is very fast, especially for his size, but we don't run go routes, etc. for him for some reason. The rest are strong and big, but generally easy to cover on simple routes.

[lex24]

They certainly should be scoring more.  But they lack speed.

Amen! We hear all the time about how deep and talented Stanford's receivers are. They are talented. They are big, both tall and strong. They are also not fast. For quite a few years Stanford has relied on having a QB that was accurate enough to put the ball where his receiver could catch it but the defender could not. That mattered, because the defender would be right there. Stanford can get separation only on plays that involve running the defenders across the entire field and creating confusion in the coverage. Otherwise, it is hope our big athletic receivers can out-fight the defenders for the ball. We also run a lot of plays where the receiver shields the catch from the defender with his body. We can do that because our receivers (usually) can withstand the hit.

This is not a sustainable situation. The defenses have figured it out and can mess it up. They know what we want to do and they know nobody is going to just blow by them. That is why Simi Fehoko made such a difference when he was at Stanford. He forced the defense to cover him deep. Even when they did, he could often run by them. At worst, he created space for our other receivers to get open. We mostly haven't had that kind of speed for a while, and it shows.

Amen. Wilson was faster than the rest and Higgins is very fast, especially for his size, but we don't run go routes, etc. for him for some reason. The rest are strong and big, but generally easy to cover on simple routes.

Higgins should be a bigger part of the offense.  To me, he’s the wide receiver with the most upside.  By far.

[lex24]

They certainly should be scoring more.  But they lack speed.

Amen! We hear all the time about how deep and talented Stanford's receivers are. They are talented. They are big, both tall and strong. They are also not fast. For quite a few years Stanford has relied on having a QB that was accurate enough to put the ball where his receiver could catch it but the defender could not. That mattered, because the defender would be right there. Stanford can get separation only on plays that involve running the defenders across the entire field and creating confusion in the coverage. Otherwise, it is hope our big athletic receivers can out-fight the defenders for the ball. We also run a lot of plays where the receiver shields the catch from the defender with his body. We can do that because our receivers (usually) can withstand the hit.

This is not a sustainable situation. The defenses have figured it out and can mess it up. They know what we want to do and they know nobody is going to just blow by them. That is why Simi Fehoko made such a difference when he was at Stanford. He forced the defense to cover him deep. Even when they did, he could often run by them. At worst, he created space for our other receivers to get open. We mostly haven't had that kind of speed for a while, and it shows.

Amen. Wilson was faster than the rest and Higgins is very fast, especially for his size, but we don't run go routes, etc. for him for some reason. The rest are strong and big, but generally easy to cover on simple routes.

Higgins should be a bigger part of the offense.  To me, he’s the wide receiver with the most upside.  By far.

[akiddoc]

Higgins is big and muscular. And soft. Goes down easily. Never breaks a tackle. Absolutely NOT nimble. Trips over his own feet. Don't believe Shaw's 4.3 40 quote. Higgins likely runs a 4.6. He runs some decent routes. Gets some catches. I don't understand why he goes down with the slightest touch. 

Humphreys is tough to tackle. But skinny and slow. 

Tremayne makes some amazing catches. But he's slow. And he drops too many easy passes. 

Wilson was darn good. Never could stay healthy.

[akiddoc]

Higgins is big and muscular. And soft. Goes down easily. Never breaks a tackle. Absolutely NOT nimble. Trips over his own feet. Don't believe Shaw's 4.3 40 quote. Higgins likely runs a 4.6. He runs some decent routes. Gets some catches. I don't understand why he goes down with the slightest touch. 

Humphreys is tough to tackle. But skinny and slow. 

Tremayne makes some amazing catches. But he's slow. And he drops too many easy passes. 

Wilson was darn good. Never could stay healthy.

[Phogge]

Zach Ertz was the best route running Stanford receiver ever. Chris Burford was slow but ran great routes. Ditto Ryan Whalen. Margerum was fast and had acrobatic body control. Lofton was fast but became a great route runner in the NFL. Andre Tyler was getting there but suffered a catastrophic injury ending his career at Stanford. The kid Doc is correct about the current WR’s, leaving Yurosek as the best route runner.

This was Wilson’s breakout year. In terms of what the injury meant to the offense, devastating.

[Phogge]

Zach Ertz was the best route running Stanford receiver ever. Chris Burford was slow but ran great routes. Ditto Ryan Whalen. Margerum was fast and had acrobatic body control. Lofton was fast but became a great route runner in the NFL. Andre Tyler was getting there but suffered a catastrophic injury ending his career at Stanford. The kid Doc is correct about the current WR’s, leaving Yurosek as the best route runner.

This was Wilson’s breakout year. In terms of what the injury meant to the offense, devastating.

[JohnR34231]

I like scoring on every drive, but a TD would be nice.

I don't think we are going to beat ASU with field goals.

Well . . . . . .

John was correct, we won with FGs AND defense, not just FGs. :)

Little did I think our defense was going to be able to hold down an offense that put up 45 against Washington the way they did. As a matter of fact, if you told me that we were going to win our last two games by putting up a grand total of one touchdown I would have said no way.
You never know. Thank God for Karty.

[JohnR34231]

I like scoring on every drive, but a TD would be nice.

I don't think we are going to beat ASU with field goals.

Well . . . . . .

John was correct, we won with FGs AND defense, not just FGs. :)

Little did I think our defense was going to be able to hold down an offense that put up 45 against Washington the way they did. As a matter of fact, if you told me that we were going to win our last two games by putting up a grand total of one touchdown I would have said no way.
You never know. Thank God for Karty.

[winflop]

I'm glad they won, and I'm glad people back on campus for reunions got to see it. But nothing about that win has done anything to change my view on the team or the program.

[winflop]

I'm glad they won, and I'm glad people back on campus for reunions got to see it. But nothing about that win has done anything to change my view on the team or the program.

[lex24]

Higgins is big and muscular. And soft. Goes down easily. Never breaks a tackle. Absolutely NOT nimble. Trips over his own feet. Don't believe Shaw's 4.3 40 quote. Higgins likely runs a 4.6. He runs some decent routes. Gets some catches. I don't understand why he goes down with the slightest touch. 

Humphreys is tough to tackle. But skinny and slow. 

Tremayne makes some amazing catches. But he's slow. And he drops too many easy passes. 

Wilson was darn good. Never could stay healthy.

Funny, I have a different take on Higgins.  Seems to me to be best if WR runners after catch.  I don’t think there is any question that their best and most reliable receiver is Yurosek. Humphreys needs to get stronger. Said same thing last year.

[lex24]

Higgins is big and muscular. And soft. Goes down easily. Never breaks a tackle. Absolutely NOT nimble. Trips over his own feet. Don't believe Shaw's 4.3 40 quote. Higgins likely runs a 4.6. He runs some decent routes. Gets some catches. I don't understand why he goes down with the slightest touch. 

Humphreys is tough to tackle. But skinny and slow. 

Tremayne makes some amazing catches. But he's slow. And he drops too many easy passes. 

Wilson was darn good. Never could stay healthy.

Funny, I have a different take on Higgins.  Seems to me to be best if WR runners after catch.  I don’t think there is any question that their best and most reliable receiver is Yurosek. Humphreys needs to get stronger. Said same thing last year.

[Austroturf]

We had 28 first downs to ASU's 19. 

How do you get 28 first downs and not score a TD?

This is a legitimate philosophical question.  I think even the ancient Greeks tried to wrap their heads around this one.

---

I'm glad they won, and I'm glad people back on campus for reunions got to see it. But nothing about that win has done anything to change my view on the team or the program.

In full agreement with this....

[Austroturf]

We had 28 first downs to ASU's 19. 

How do you get 28 first downs and not score a TD?

This is a legitimate philosophical question.  I think even the ancient Greeks tried to wrap their heads around this one.

---

I'm glad they won, and I'm glad people back on campus for reunions got to see it. But nothing about that win has done anything to change my view on the team or the program.

In full agreement with this....

[gailtate]

We had 28 first downs to ASU's 19. 

How do you get 28 first downs and not score a TD?

This is a legitimate philosophical question.  I think even the ancient Greeks tried to wrap their heads around this one.

---

I'm glad they won, and I'm glad people back on campus for reunions got to see it. But nothing about that win has done anything to change my view on the team or the program.

In full agreement with this....

I think y'all know where I stand. So reflect on this: Sacramento State attracted a bigger crowd at their game last night against Montana. 

And there are people who still Trust In Shaw. Live in past, die in the past. Reversion to the historical mean of mediocrity.

[gailtate]

We had 28 first downs to ASU's 19. 

How do you get 28 first downs and not score a TD?

This is a legitimate philosophical question.  I think even the ancient Greeks tried to wrap their heads around this one.

---

I'm glad they won, and I'm glad people back on campus for reunions got to see it. But nothing about that win has done anything to change my view on the team or the program.

In full agreement with this....

I think y'all know where I stand. So reflect on this: Sacramento State attracted a bigger crowd at their game last night against Montana. 

And there are people who still Trust In Shaw. Live in past, die in the past. Reversion to the historical mean of mediocrity.

[lex24]

We had 28 first downs to ASU's 19. 

How do you get 28 first downs and not score a TD?

This is a legitimate philosophical question.  I think even the ancient Greeks tried to wrap their heads around this one.

---

I'm glad they won, and I'm glad people back on campus for reunions got to see it. But nothing about that win has done anything to change my view on the team or the program.

In full agreement with this....

I think y'all know where I stand. So reflect on this: Sacramento State attracted a bigger crowd at their game last night against Montana. 

And there are people who still Trust In Shaw. Live in past, die in the past. Reversion to the historical mean of mediocrity.

Attendance is not just a Stanford problem.  (As Marshawn Lynch so vividly pointed out.) Cal has about 35,000 students, a much bigger base and it can’t draw either.  Obviously winning matters. But unfortunately college football in the bay area is if not dead certainly dying.

[lex24]

We had 28 first downs to ASU's 19. 

How do you get 28 first downs and not score a TD?

This is a legitimate philosophical question.  I think even the ancient Greeks tried to wrap their heads around this one.

---

I'm glad they won, and I'm glad people back on campus for reunions got to see it. But nothing about that win has done anything to change my view on the team or the program.

In full agreement with this....

I think y'all know where I stand. So reflect on this: Sacramento State attracted a bigger crowd at their game last night against Montana. 

And there are people who still Trust In Shaw. Live in past, die in the past. Reversion to the historical mean of mediocrity.

Attendance is not just a Stanford problem.  (As Marshawn Lynch so vividly pointed out.) Cal has about 35,000 students, a much bigger base and it can’t draw either.  Obviously winning matters. But unfortunately college football in the bay area is if not dead certainly dying.

[gailtate]

We had 28 first downs to ASU's 19. 

How do you get 28 first downs and not score a TD?

This is a legitimate philosophical question.  I think even the ancient Greeks tried to wrap their heads around this one.

---

I'm glad they won, and I'm glad people back on campus for reunions got to see it. But nothing about that win has done anything to change my view on the team or the program.

In full agreement with this....

I think y'all know where I stand. So reflect on this: Sacramento State attracted a bigger crowd at their game last night against Montana. 

And there are people who still Trust In Shaw. Live in past, die in the past. Reversion to the historical mean of mediocrity.

Attendance is not just a Stanford problem.  (As Marshawn Lynch so vividly pointed out.) Cal has about 35,000 students, a much bigger base and it can’t draw either.  Obviously winning matters. But unfortunately college football in the bay area is if not dead certainly dying.

The current program is NOT HELPING.

[gailtate]

We had 28 first downs to ASU's 19. 

How do you get 28 first downs and not score a TD?

This is a legitimate philosophical question.  I think even the ancient Greeks tried to wrap their heads around this one.

---

I'm glad they won, and I'm glad people back on campus for reunions got to see it. But nothing about that win has done anything to change my view on the team or the program.

In full agreement with this....

I think y'all know where I stand. So reflect on this: Sacramento State attracted a bigger crowd at their game last night against Montana. 

And there are people who still Trust In Shaw. Live in past, die in the past. Reversion to the historical mean of mediocrity.

Attendance is not just a Stanford problem.  (As Marshawn Lynch so vividly pointed out.) Cal has about 35,000 students, a much bigger base and it can’t draw either.  Obviously winning matters. But unfortunately college football in the bay area is if not dead certainly dying.

The current program is NOT HELPING.

[lex24]

We had 28 first downs to ASU's 19. 

How do you get 28 first downs and not score a TD?

This is a legitimate philosophical question.  I think even the ancient Greeks tried to wrap their heads around this one.

---

I'm glad they won, and I'm glad people back on campus for reunions got to see it. But nothing about that win has done anything to change my view on the team or the program.

In full agreement with this....

I think y'all know where I stand. So reflect on this: Sacramento State attracted a bigger crowd at their game last night against Montana. 

And there are people who still Trust In Shaw. Live in past, die in the past. Reversion to the historical mean of mediocrity.

Attendance is not just a Stanford problem.  (As Marshawn Lynch so vividly pointed out.) Cal has about 35,000 students, a much bigger base and it can’t draw either.  Obviously winning matters. But unfortunately college football in the bay area is if not dead certainly dying.

The current program is NOT HELPING.

Yes, we know that. Gail, you and I have “disagreed” more than once…. But I agree with you that a change is in order. I just don’t think it’s going to happen. No matter how much people on this board scream for it. So, I hope for improvement within the current situation. Probably hoping in vain. But what the hell…..

[lex24]

We had 28 first downs to ASU's 19. 

How do you get 28 first downs and not score a TD?

This is a legitimate philosophical question.  I think even the ancient Greeks tried to wrap their heads around this one.

---

I'm glad they won, and I'm glad people back on campus for reunions got to see it. But nothing about that win has done anything to change my view on the team or the program.

In full agreement with this....

I think y'all know where I stand. So reflect on this: Sacramento State attracted a bigger crowd at their game last night against Montana. 

And there are people who still Trust In Shaw. Live in past, die in the past. Reversion to the historical mean of mediocrity.

Attendance is not just a Stanford problem.  (As Marshawn Lynch so vividly pointed out.) Cal has about 35,000 students, a much bigger base and it can’t draw either.  Obviously winning matters. But unfortunately college football in the bay area is if not dead certainly dying.

The current program is NOT HELPING.

Yes, we know that. Gail, you and I have “disagreed” more than once…. But I agree with you that a change is in order. I just don’t think it’s going to happen. No matter how much people on this board scream for it. So, I hope for improvement within the current situation. Probably hoping in vain. But what the hell…..