[StanUSwagU]

Institutional roadblocks aside, I still think Taylor's seat-heater deserves to be clicked on.  

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

All good points.
I’m reminded of Yankees back in the day. The owner didn’t tolerate losing
Patience was in short supply.
Managers were fired spontaneously and often for poor team performance.
But Muir isn’t Steinbrenner and Cards are not the Yankees
Hence I’d be shocked if any move towards Coach TT is taken any time before end of this season, if then.

Oh, for sure.  No real point in doing anything before the end of the season, unless needed to secure someone new.  That said, I'm very aware the whole concept of pro-actively replacing a bad coach in a timely manner is something between a pipe dream and a coin in a fountain. Same could be said for all of the program's other administration-imposed obstacles. If they go 2-10 this season, maybe they'd take some action on the coach, but I'd still put the odds at or under 50%, sadly.

*************

Row80Critic:

All great points!

Since money talks in these here UnitedStates of America, I am going to predict that if we have several 3-9 seasons in Football & the AthleticDept starts to operate deeply in the red, and our University is 'Losing out on the $30-40 Milion Dollars per Year payouts that Big10 & SEC Universities get from their Conference Payouts', ...over time some at the Higher Levels of our University are going to start looking at the 'End of Year Financial Statements' & wondering why we are falling behind Univ of Michigan & Univ of Texas, in terms of 'Revenue Sources incoming from this revenue source.

Although as BostonCard was kind enough to share with me that 'Losing out on the $30-40 Million Dollars a Year, from being BigTime in Football & Mens Basketball' is not such an incentive for change at Stanford, because '$30-40 Million a Year from Conference Payouts' is but a drop in the bucket of Stanfords Endowment & overall OperatingBudget, ...I do think when one misses out on "10-20 years of $30-40 Million a Year Payouts from Conference Payouts" ....some at StanU will start to have a rethink on matters. No Organization, in these here United States of America (however big their Endowment or Overall Budget), ... can dismiss 10-20 years of losing out on "30-40 Million Dollar a Year Conference Payouts !"

One doesn't have to be a StanfordGrad to calculate the revenue product of [$40 Million per Year x 20 Years] !

[StanUSwagU]

Institutional roadblocks aside, I still think Taylor's seat-heater deserves to be clicked on.  

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

All good points.
I’m reminded of Yankees back in the day. The owner didn’t tolerate losing
Patience was in short supply.
Managers were fired spontaneously and often for poor team performance.
But Muir isn’t Steinbrenner and Cards are not the Yankees
Hence I’d be shocked if any move towards Coach TT is taken any time before end of this season, if then.

Oh, for sure.  No real point in doing anything before the end of the season, unless needed to secure someone new.  That said, I'm very aware the whole concept of pro-actively replacing a bad coach in a timely manner is something between a pipe dream and a coin in a fountain. Same could be said for all of the program's other administration-imposed obstacles. If they go 2-10 this season, maybe they'd take some action on the coach, but I'd still put the odds at or under 50%, sadly.

*************

Row80Critic:

All great points!

Since money talks in these here UnitedStates of America, I am going to predict that if we have several 3-9 seasons in Football & the AthleticDept starts to operate deeply in the red, and our University is 'Losing out on the $30-40 Milion Dollars per Year payouts that Big10 & SEC Universities get from their Conference Payouts', ...over time some at the Higher Levels of our University are going to start looking at the 'End of Year Financial Statements' & wondering why we are falling behind Univ of Michigan & Univ of Texas, in terms of 'Revenue Sources incoming from this revenue source.

Although as BostonCard was kind enough to share with me that 'Losing out on the $30-40 Million Dollars a Year, from being BigTime in Football & Mens Basketball' is not such an incentive for change at Stanford, because '$30-40 Million a Year from Conference Payouts' is but a drop in the bucket of Stanfords Endowment & overall OperatingBudget, ...I do think when one misses out on "10-20 years of $30-40 Million a Year Payouts from Conference Payouts" ....some at StanU will start to have a rethink on matters. No Organization, in these here United States of America (however big their Endowment or Overall Budget), ... can dismiss 10-20 years of losing out on "30-40 Million Dollar a Year Conference Payouts !"

One doesn't have to be a StanfordGrad to calculate the revenue product of [$40 Million per Year x 20 Years] !

[MV72018]

We had a very nice final drive going, advanced gradually down the field, and were already in FG range, which would have tied it. All we had to do was not fumble it, not throw an INT, and not get another major penalty. We were on the 36 yard line, 2nd and 10 w/ 28 seconds to go. 

After a pump that fooled absolutely no one, Daniels literally FLOATED the ball toward the left sideline but inbounds, intending it for Ayomanor. His throw was GROSSLY INACCURATE, approximately 6 yards beyond Ayomanor, who was double covered! I put a lot of the blame for this on TT for going to the well too often especially after Ayom had caught several on this drive. With two defenders covering Ayom, there must have been some other receiver open or single covered who could have gotten the first down on a completion and stopped the clock. IMO, that was a RIDICULOUS call and POOR execution. The ball was so far over Ayom's head that he actually gave up trying to get near it even before it was intercepted. The game was right there for us to win or at least tie. 

Color me not just frustrated but ANGRY.

[MV72018]

We had a very nice final drive going, advanced gradually down the field, and were already in FG range, which would have tied it. All we had to do was not fumble it, not throw an INT, and not get another major penalty. We were on the 36 yard line, 2nd and 10 w/ 28 seconds to go. 

After a pump that fooled absolutely no one, Daniels literally FLOATED the ball toward the left sideline but inbounds, intending it for Ayomanor. His throw was GROSSLY INACCURATE, approximately 6 yards beyond Ayomanor, who was double covered! I put a lot of the blame for this on TT for going to the well too often especially after Ayom had caught several on this drive. With two defenders covering Ayom, there must have been some other receiver open or single covered who could have gotten the first down on a completion and stopped the clock. IMO, that was a RIDICULOUS call and POOR execution. The ball was so far over Ayom's head that he actually gave up trying to get near it even before it was intercepted. The game was right there for us to win or at least tie. 

Color me not just frustrated but ANGRY.

[GK3]

Institutional roadblocks aside, I still think Taylor's seat-heater deserves to be clicked on.  

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

All good points.
I’m reminded of Yankees back in the day. The owner didn’t tolerate losing
Patience was in short supply.
Managers were fired spontaneously and often for poor team performance.
But Muir isn’t Steinbrenner and Cards are not the Yankees
Hence I’d be shocked if any move towards Coach TT is taken any time before end of this season, if then.

Oh, for sure.  No real point in doing anything before the end of the season, unless needed to secure someone new.  That said, I'm very aware the whole concept of pro-actively replacing a bad coach in a timely manner is something between a pipe dream and a coin in a fountain. Same could be said for all of the program's other administration-imposed obstacles. If they go 2-10 this season, maybe they'd take some action on the coach, but I'd still put the odds at or under 50%, sadly.

*************

Row80Critic: 

All great points!

Since money talks in these here UnitedStates of America, I am going to predict that if we have several 3-9 seasons in Football & the AthleticDept starts to operate deeply in the red, and our University is 'Losing out on the $30-40 Milion Dollars per Year payouts that Big10 & SEC Universities get from their Conference Payouts', ...over time some at the Higher Levels of our University are going to start looking at the 'Quarterly Financial Statements' & wondering why we are falling behind Univ Of Michigan & Univ of Texas, in terms of 'Revenue Sources incoming from this revenue source.

Although as BostonCard was kind enough to share with me that 'Losing out on the $30-40 Million Dollars a Year, from being BigTime in Football & Mens Basketball' is not such an incentive for change at Stanford, because  '$30-40 Million a Year from Conference Payouts' is but a drop in the bucket of Stanfords Endowment & overall OperatingBudget, ...I do think when one misses out on "10 years of $30-40 Million a Year Payouts from Conference Payouts" ....some at StanU will start to have a rethink on matters.  No Organization, in these here United States of America (however big their Endowment or Overall Budget), ... can dismiss 10-20 years of losing out on "30-40 Million Dollar a Year Conference Payouts !" 

Once doesn't have to be a StanfordGrad to calculate the revenue product of  [$40 Million per Year  x 20 Years] !

Agreed!
I also think that with TV constantly showing basically an
empty stadium and not much interest from the few fans there, we are sending a very negative 3 hour advertisement  our every time we play a home game.  Kids we are recruiting must look at that and think "Do I really want to play college football in front of fewer fans than when in high school?"
The problem isn't going to fix itself and yes somewhere, sometime someone high up is going to start to seriously ask WHY should we continue down this road.  Not only are we losing money, but the negative image of the school is not a good one.
We can blame the NIL and the Portal but we also need to blame our school which does so little to market its sports teams.  The Bay Area being what it is offers lots and lots of ways for people to spend their entertainment dollar, and most would not spend the cost of a good seat in Stanford Stadium to watch this team.

[GK3]

Institutional roadblocks aside, I still think Taylor's seat-heater deserves to be clicked on.  

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

All good points.
I’m reminded of Yankees back in the day. The owner didn’t tolerate losing
Patience was in short supply.
Managers were fired spontaneously and often for poor team performance.
But Muir isn’t Steinbrenner and Cards are not the Yankees
Hence I’d be shocked if any move towards Coach TT is taken any time before end of this season, if then.

Oh, for sure.  No real point in doing anything before the end of the season, unless needed to secure someone new.  That said, I'm very aware the whole concept of pro-actively replacing a bad coach in a timely manner is something between a pipe dream and a coin in a fountain. Same could be said for all of the program's other administration-imposed obstacles. If they go 2-10 this season, maybe they'd take some action on the coach, but I'd still put the odds at or under 50%, sadly.

*************

Row80Critic: 

All great points!

Since money talks in these here UnitedStates of America, I am going to predict that if we have several 3-9 seasons in Football & the AthleticDept starts to operate deeply in the red, and our University is 'Losing out on the $30-40 Milion Dollars per Year payouts that Big10 & SEC Universities get from their Conference Payouts', ...over time some at the Higher Levels of our University are going to start looking at the 'Quarterly Financial Statements' & wondering why we are falling behind Univ Of Michigan & Univ of Texas, in terms of 'Revenue Sources incoming from this revenue source.

Although as BostonCard was kind enough to share with me that 'Losing out on the $30-40 Million Dollars a Year, from being BigTime in Football & Mens Basketball' is not such an incentive for change at Stanford, because  '$30-40 Million a Year from Conference Payouts' is but a drop in the bucket of Stanfords Endowment & overall OperatingBudget, ...I do think when one misses out on "10 years of $30-40 Million a Year Payouts from Conference Payouts" ....some at StanU will start to have a rethink on matters.  No Organization, in these here United States of America (however big their Endowment or Overall Budget), ... can dismiss 10-20 years of losing out on "30-40 Million Dollar a Year Conference Payouts !" 

Once doesn't have to be a StanfordGrad to calculate the revenue product of  [$40 Million per Year  x 20 Years] !

Agreed!
I also think that with TV constantly showing basically an
empty stadium and not much interest from the few fans there, we are sending a very negative 3 hour advertisement  our every time we play a home game.  Kids we are recruiting must look at that and think "Do I really want to play college football in front of fewer fans than when in high school?"
The problem isn't going to fix itself and yes somewhere, sometime someone high up is going to start to seriously ask WHY should we continue down this road.  Not only are we losing money, but the negative image of the school is not a good one.
We can blame the NIL and the Portal but we also need to blame our school which does so little to market its sports teams.  The Bay Area being what it is offers lots and lots of ways for people to spend their entertainment dollar, and most would not spend the cost of a good seat in Stanford Stadium to watch this team.

[StanUSwagU]

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

All good points.
I’m reminded of Yankees back in the day. The owner didn’t tolerate losing
Patience was in short supply.
Managers were fired spontaneously and often for poor team performance.
But Muir isn’t Steinbrenner and Cards are not the Yankees
Hence I’d be shocked if any move towards Coach TT is taken any time before end of this season, if then.

Oh, for sure.  No real point in doing anything before the end of the season, unless needed to secure someone new.  That said, I'm very aware the whole concept of pro-actively replacing a bad coach in a timely manner is something between a pipe dream and a coin in a fountain. Same could be said for all of the program's other administration-imposed obstacles. If they go 2-10 this season, maybe they'd take some action on the coach, but I'd still put the odds at or under 50%, sadly.

*************

Row80Critic: 

All great points!

Since money talks in these here UnitedStates of America, I am going to predict that if we have several 3-9 seasons in Football & the AthleticDept starts to operate deeply in the red, and our University is 'Losing out on the $30-40 Milion Dollars per Year payouts that Big10 & SEC Universities get from their Conference Payouts', ...over time some at the Higher Levels of our University are going to start looking at the 'Quarterly Financial Statements' & wondering why we are falling behind Univ Of Michigan & Univ of Texas, in terms of 'Revenue Sources incoming from this revenue source.

Although as BostonCard was kind enough to share with me that 'Losing out on the $30-40 Million Dollars a Year, from being BigTime in Football & Mens Basketball' is not such an incentive for change at Stanford, because  '$30-40 Million a Year from Conference Payouts' is but a drop in the bucket of Stanfords Endowment & overall OperatingBudget, ...I do think when one misses out on "10 years of $30-40 Million a Year Payouts from Conference Payouts" ....some at StanU will start to have a rethink on matters.  No Organization, in these here United States of America (however big their Endowment or Overall Budget), ... can dismiss 10-20 years of losing out on "30-40 Million Dollar a Year Conference Payouts !" 

One doesn't have to be a StanfordGrad to calculate the revenue product of  [$40 Million per Year  x 20 Years] !

Agreed!
I also think that with TV constantly showing basically an
empty stadium and not much interest from the few fans there, we are sending a very negative 3 hour advertisement  our every time we play a home game.  Kids we are recruiting must look at that and think "Do I really want to play college football in front of fewer fans than when in high school?"
The problem isn't going to fix itself and yes somewhere, sometime someone high up is going to start to seriously ask WHY should we continue down this road.  Not only are we losing money, but the negative image of the school is not a good one.
We can blame the NIL and the Portal but we also need to blame our school which does so little to market its sports teams.  The Bay Area being what it is offers lots and lots of ways for people to spend their entertainment dollar, and most would not spend the cost of a good seat in Stanford Stadium to watch this team.

Agree 100% GK3

Its not a good look for a University that proclaims to 'Seek Excellence in All Things' & Proclaims to have some of the 'Best Problem Solvers in the World' ....to have a Football Program & Mens Basketball program like ours, that have been declining & languishing for the last 8yrs [and yes our Football program was winning but declining 8 yrs ago]

[StanUSwagU]

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

All good points.
I’m reminded of Yankees back in the day. The owner didn’t tolerate losing
Patience was in short supply.
Managers were fired spontaneously and often for poor team performance.
But Muir isn’t Steinbrenner and Cards are not the Yankees
Hence I’d be shocked if any move towards Coach TT is taken any time before end of this season, if then.

Oh, for sure.  No real point in doing anything before the end of the season, unless needed to secure someone new.  That said, I'm very aware the whole concept of pro-actively replacing a bad coach in a timely manner is something between a pipe dream and a coin in a fountain. Same could be said for all of the program's other administration-imposed obstacles. If they go 2-10 this season, maybe they'd take some action on the coach, but I'd still put the odds at or under 50%, sadly.

*************

Row80Critic: 

All great points!

Since money talks in these here UnitedStates of America, I am going to predict that if we have several 3-9 seasons in Football & the AthleticDept starts to operate deeply in the red, and our University is 'Losing out on the $30-40 Milion Dollars per Year payouts that Big10 & SEC Universities get from their Conference Payouts', ...over time some at the Higher Levels of our University are going to start looking at the 'Quarterly Financial Statements' & wondering why we are falling behind Univ Of Michigan & Univ of Texas, in terms of 'Revenue Sources incoming from this revenue source.

Although as BostonCard was kind enough to share with me that 'Losing out on the $30-40 Million Dollars a Year, from being BigTime in Football & Mens Basketball' is not such an incentive for change at Stanford, because  '$30-40 Million a Year from Conference Payouts' is but a drop in the bucket of Stanfords Endowment & overall OperatingBudget, ...I do think when one misses out on "10 years of $30-40 Million a Year Payouts from Conference Payouts" ....some at StanU will start to have a rethink on matters.  No Organization, in these here United States of America (however big their Endowment or Overall Budget), ... can dismiss 10-20 years of losing out on "30-40 Million Dollar a Year Conference Payouts !" 

One doesn't have to be a StanfordGrad to calculate the revenue product of  [$40 Million per Year  x 20 Years] !

Agreed!
I also think that with TV constantly showing basically an
empty stadium and not much interest from the few fans there, we are sending a very negative 3 hour advertisement  our every time we play a home game.  Kids we are recruiting must look at that and think "Do I really want to play college football in front of fewer fans than when in high school?"
The problem isn't going to fix itself and yes somewhere, sometime someone high up is going to start to seriously ask WHY should we continue down this road.  Not only are we losing money, but the negative image of the school is not a good one.
We can blame the NIL and the Portal but we also need to blame our school which does so little to market its sports teams.  The Bay Area being what it is offers lots and lots of ways for people to spend their entertainment dollar, and most would not spend the cost of a good seat in Stanford Stadium to watch this team.

Agree 100% GK3

Its not a good look for a University that proclaims to 'Seek Excellence in All Things' & Proclaims to have some of the 'Best Problem Solvers in the World' ....to have a Football Program & Mens Basketball program like ours, that have been declining & languishing for the last 8yrs [and yes our Football program was winning but declining 8 yrs ago]

[Goose]

We had a very nice final drive going, advanced gradually down the field, and were already in FG range, which would have tied it. All we had to do was not fumble it, not throw an INT, and not get another major penalty. We were on the 36 yard line, 2nd and 10 w/ 28 seconds to go. 

After a pump that fooled absolutely no one, Daniels literally FLOATED the ball toward the left sideline but inbounds, intending it for Ayomanor. His throw was GROSSLY INACCURATE, approximately 6 yards beyond Ayomanor, who was double covered! I put a lot of the blame for this on TT for going to the well too often especially after Ayom had caught several on this drive. With two defenders covering Ayom, there must have been some other receiver open or single covered who could have gotten the first down on a completion and stopped the clock. IMO, that was a RIDICULOUS call and POOR execution. 

Why was it a "ridiculous" call? As you say, with Ayomanor double covered there should be some other receiver available and "more open". Clearly WF was worried about getting burned again by the same play that had hammered them previously. IMO the play was fine. It actually "worked". Syracuse single covered Ayomanor and got burned. WF didn't do that. The problem was that Daniels couldn't read the field and find the open man. That may be TT's fault (because he is also the QB coach) but it wasn't the play call that did that. It was simply horrible decision making by Daniels.

The ball was so far over Ayom's head that he actually gave up trying to get near it even before it was intercepted. The game was right there for us to win or at least tie. 

Color me not just frustrated but ANGRY.

I think Ayomanor believed Daniels was just throwing the ball away. The throw was so inaccurate (and way too high) that was a reasonable belief. Watching from the stands that is what I thought Daniels was doing. However this isn't the first time we have seen Daniels make almost the same throw. We have seen it at least twice before in other games. The ball thrown into coverage near the sideline didn't go out of bounds and was intercepted. I had the same wrong apprehension in those cases as well. Daniels obviously "missed". Why he would throw it anywhere near a double covered receiver is the question. If there really is nobody else open, throw it away!

It is also worthy of note that Daniels got sacked earlier in the game taking us out of field goal range. This was right after a clock stoppage. I would hope TT's last words to him as he went back on the field were "don't get sacked". Daniels isn't a particularly accurate passer. That may be hard to "fix". However, his apparent lack of decision making capability/reading the field is something that should be "fixable". The lack of progress in that area is disturbing.

[Goose]

We had a very nice final drive going, advanced gradually down the field, and were already in FG range, which would have tied it. All we had to do was not fumble it, not throw an INT, and not get another major penalty. We were on the 36 yard line, 2nd and 10 w/ 28 seconds to go. 

After a pump that fooled absolutely no one, Daniels literally FLOATED the ball toward the left sideline but inbounds, intending it for Ayomanor. His throw was GROSSLY INACCURATE, approximately 6 yards beyond Ayomanor, who was double covered! I put a lot of the blame for this on TT for going to the well too often especially after Ayom had caught several on this drive. With two defenders covering Ayom, there must have been some other receiver open or single covered who could have gotten the first down on a completion and stopped the clock. IMO, that was a RIDICULOUS call and POOR execution. 

Why was it a "ridiculous" call? As you say, with Ayomanor double covered there should be some other receiver available and "more open". Clearly WF was worried about getting burned again by the same play that had hammered them previously. IMO the play was fine. It actually "worked". Syracuse single covered Ayomanor and got burned. WF didn't do that. The problem was that Daniels couldn't read the field and find the open man. That may be TT's fault (because he is also the QB coach) but it wasn't the play call that did that. It was simply horrible decision making by Daniels.

The ball was so far over Ayom's head that he actually gave up trying to get near it even before it was intercepted. The game was right there for us to win or at least tie. 

Color me not just frustrated but ANGRY.

I think Ayomanor believed Daniels was just throwing the ball away. The throw was so inaccurate (and way too high) that was a reasonable belief. Watching from the stands that is what I thought Daniels was doing. However this isn't the first time we have seen Daniels make almost the same throw. We have seen it at least twice before in other games. The ball thrown into coverage near the sideline didn't go out of bounds and was intercepted. I had the same wrong apprehension in those cases as well. Daniels obviously "missed". Why he would throw it anywhere near a double covered receiver is the question. If there really is nobody else open, throw it away!

It is also worthy of note that Daniels got sacked earlier in the game taking us out of field goal range. This was right after a clock stoppage. I would hope TT's last words to him as he went back on the field were "don't get sacked". Daniels isn't a particularly accurate passer. That may be hard to "fix". However, his apparent lack of decision making capability/reading the field is something that should be "fixable". The lack of progress in that area is disturbing.

[chrisk]

Stanford will need several years under Levin along with several years of Big 10 / SEC laying out its cards, before it makes sense to change the football program dramatically.

Why hire a new coach when the issue of which level Stanford will be playing at it in the future is open? Will it be playing with the Top 40 or will it be playing in the next level down? The next level down is still way above the Ivy League that some are afraid of turning into.

Let's hold off on the coaching changes until we know more about the path forward. A new coach is going to want that clarity.

[chrisk]

Stanford will need several years under Levin along with several years of Big 10 / SEC laying out its cards, before it makes sense to change the football program dramatically.

Why hire a new coach when the issue of which level Stanford will be playing at it in the future is open? Will it be playing with the Top 40 or will it be playing in the next level down? The next level down is still way above the Ivy League that some are afraid of turning into.

Let's hold off on the coaching changes until we know more about the path forward. A new coach is going to want that clarity.

[SkiBum80]

Coach TT, when it was just becoming news that we would make it into the ACC, was very clear that he considered it a great move. He welcomed Stanford entering the ACC. Because it offers the possibility of playing big time football. At least far above what diminishing options were left to us. So basically Coach got his wish. And the ACC getting the opportunity, other than Syracuse, to pad their bowl eligibility path with us.

[SkiBum80]

Coach TT, when it was just becoming news that we would make it into the ACC, was very clear that he considered it a great move. He welcomed Stanford entering the ACC. Because it offers the possibility of playing big time football. At least far above what diminishing options were left to us. So basically Coach got his wish. And the ACC getting the opportunity, other than Syracuse, to pad their bowl eligibility path with us.

[Gary86]

I'm not sure if Taylor should get another year. I am sure that Muir should not.

[Gary86]

I'm not sure if Taylor should get another year. I am sure that Muir should not.

[Row80Critic]

We had a very nice final drive going, advanced gradually down the field, and were already in FG range, which would have tied it. All we had to do was not fumble it, not throw an INT, and not get another major penalty. We were on the 36 yard line, 2nd and 10 w/ 28 seconds to go. 

After a pump that fooled absolutely no one, Daniels literally FLOATED the ball toward the left sideline but inbounds, intending it for Ayomanor. His throw was GROSSLY INACCURATE, approximately 6 yards beyond Ayomanor, who was double covered! I put a lot of the blame for this on TT for going to the well too often especially after Ayom had caught several on this drive. With two defenders covering Ayom, there must have been some other receiver open or single covered who could have gotten the first down on a completion and stopped the clock. IMO, that was a RIDICULOUS call and POOR execution. 

Why was it a "ridiculous" call? As you say, with Ayomanor double covered there should be some other receiver available and "more open". Clearly WF was worried about getting burned again by the same play that had hammered them previously. IMO the play was fine. It actually "worked". Syracuse single covered Ayomanor and got burned. WF didn't do that. The problem was that Daniels couldn't read the field and find the open man. That may be TT's fault (because he is also the QB coach) but it wasn't the play call that did that. It was simply horrible decision making by Daniels.

The ball was so far over Ayom's head that he actually gave up trying to get near it even before it was intercepted. The game was right there for us to win or at least tie. 

Color me not just frustrated but ANGRY.

I think Ayomanor believed Daniels was just throwing the ball away. The throw was so inaccurate (and way too high) that was a reasonable belief. Watching from the stands that is what I thought Daniels was doing. However this isn't the first time we have seen Daniels make almost the same throw. We have seen it at least twice before in other games. The ball thrown into coverage near the sideline didn't go out of bounds and was intercepted. I had the same wrong apprehension in those cases as well. Daniels obviously "missed". Why he would throw it anywhere near a double covered receiver is the question. If there really is nobody else open, throw it away!

It is also worthy of note that Daniels got sacked earlier in the game taking us out of field goal range. This was right after a clock stoppage. I would hope TT's last words to him as he went back on the field were "don't get sacked". Daniels isn't a particularly accurate passer. That may be hard to "fix". However, his apparent lack of decision making capability/reading the field is something that should be "fixable". The lack of progress in that area is disturbing.

It was a bad call to let Daniels throw deep in that situation.  Daniels has accuracy problems.  Taylor has acknowledged that.  The offence was making its way down the field and was already in field goal range to force OT.  If they stayed the course for a few more plays, worst case they'd be in chip-shot range, and possibly would have opened something up for a realistic shot at the end zone.  Even with a highly accurate QB, a ball thrown 45-55 yards in the air is a low probability play.  With an inaccurate passer, it puts the game at risk and, in this case, lost it.   And while it wasn't a good pass, I don't really blame Daniels.  He was playing well in his comfort zone, so it was a bone-head move to ask him to win the game on one big heave.  That's not who he is.  Good coaches work with the talent they have, not against it.  And don't get me started on the see-it-from-space Lamson run play, or going for it on 4th for no reason deep in their own territory again TCU.  "We have analytics."  Give me a break. 

I get that it is easy to second guess after a loss, but the bottom line is irrefutable: he has the worst win-loss record in the history of the program.  And, no, he's not the only coach to face personnel challenges or wish the University would relax its admission standards.

[Row80Critic]

We had a very nice final drive going, advanced gradually down the field, and were already in FG range, which would have tied it. All we had to do was not fumble it, not throw an INT, and not get another major penalty. We were on the 36 yard line, 2nd and 10 w/ 28 seconds to go. 

After a pump that fooled absolutely no one, Daniels literally FLOATED the ball toward the left sideline but inbounds, intending it for Ayomanor. His throw was GROSSLY INACCURATE, approximately 6 yards beyond Ayomanor, who was double covered! I put a lot of the blame for this on TT for going to the well too often especially after Ayom had caught several on this drive. With two defenders covering Ayom, there must have been some other receiver open or single covered who could have gotten the first down on a completion and stopped the clock. IMO, that was a RIDICULOUS call and POOR execution. 

Why was it a "ridiculous" call? As you say, with Ayomanor double covered there should be some other receiver available and "more open". Clearly WF was worried about getting burned again by the same play that had hammered them previously. IMO the play was fine. It actually "worked". Syracuse single covered Ayomanor and got burned. WF didn't do that. The problem was that Daniels couldn't read the field and find the open man. That may be TT's fault (because he is also the QB coach) but it wasn't the play call that did that. It was simply horrible decision making by Daniels.

The ball was so far over Ayom's head that he actually gave up trying to get near it even before it was intercepted. The game was right there for us to win or at least tie. 

Color me not just frustrated but ANGRY.

I think Ayomanor believed Daniels was just throwing the ball away. The throw was so inaccurate (and way too high) that was a reasonable belief. Watching from the stands that is what I thought Daniels was doing. However this isn't the first time we have seen Daniels make almost the same throw. We have seen it at least twice before in other games. The ball thrown into coverage near the sideline didn't go out of bounds and was intercepted. I had the same wrong apprehension in those cases as well. Daniels obviously "missed". Why he would throw it anywhere near a double covered receiver is the question. If there really is nobody else open, throw it away!

It is also worthy of note that Daniels got sacked earlier in the game taking us out of field goal range. This was right after a clock stoppage. I would hope TT's last words to him as he went back on the field were "don't get sacked". Daniels isn't a particularly accurate passer. That may be hard to "fix". However, his apparent lack of decision making capability/reading the field is something that should be "fixable". The lack of progress in that area is disturbing.

It was a bad call to let Daniels throw deep in that situation.  Daniels has accuracy problems.  Taylor has acknowledged that.  The offence was making its way down the field and was already in field goal range to force OT.  If they stayed the course for a few more plays, worst case they'd be in chip-shot range, and possibly would have opened something up for a realistic shot at the end zone.  Even with a highly accurate QB, a ball thrown 45-55 yards in the air is a low probability play.  With an inaccurate passer, it puts the game at risk and, in this case, lost it.   And while it wasn't a good pass, I don't really blame Daniels.  He was playing well in his comfort zone, so it was a bone-head move to ask him to win the game on one big heave.  That's not who he is.  Good coaches work with the talent they have, not against it.  And don't get me started on the see-it-from-space Lamson run play, or going for it on 4th for no reason deep in their own territory again TCU.  "We have analytics."  Give me a break. 

I get that it is easy to second guess after a loss, but the bottom line is irrefutable: he has the worst win-loss record in the history of the program.  And, no, he's not the only coach to face personnel challenges or wish the University would relax its admission standards.

[SkiBum80]

Row80 one thing in your post tripped this thought.
I’ve thought there’s been too many deep pass play attempts all season long. So many of them haven’t clicked. Many have either been off target QB throws, and/or our receiver is just really not open. I thought Brown showed great promise w more accurate throws in CalPoly game but hasn’t followed it up since. And Daniels just never had it (consistently accurate long throws).
So it baffled me why not more short quick passing routes and more use of tight ends as receivers.
In this game I thought Roush proved he is worthy of more frequent targeting & his gain after reception was impressive.
I’m hopeful this becomes a trend to build on in the remaining games.

[SkiBum80]

Row80 one thing in your post tripped this thought.
I’ve thought there’s been too many deep pass play attempts all season long. So many of them haven’t clicked. Many have either been off target QB throws, and/or our receiver is just really not open. I thought Brown showed great promise w more accurate throws in CalPoly game but hasn’t followed it up since. And Daniels just never had it (consistently accurate long throws).
So it baffled me why not more short quick passing routes and more use of tight ends as receivers.
In this game I thought Roush proved he is worthy of more frequent targeting & his gain after reception was impressive.
I’m hopeful this becomes a trend to build on in the remaining games.

[Goose]

It was a bad call to let Daniels throw deep in that situation.  Daniels has accuracy problems.  Taylor has acknowledged that.  The offence was making its way down the field and was already in field goal range to force OT.  If they stayed the course for a few more plays, worst case they'd be in chip-shot range, and possibly would have opened something up for a realistic shot at the end zone.  Even with a highly accurate QB, a ball thrown 45-55 yards in the air is a low probability play.  With an inaccurate passer, it puts the game at risk and, in this case, lost it.   And while it wasn't a good pass, I don't really blame Daniels.  He was playing well in his comfort zone, so it was a bone-head move to ask him to win the game on one big heave.

TT didn't ask him to win the game on one big heave, or even anything remotely like that. He asked him to go out there and make the correct play, which in this case was NOT to throw it to a double-covered Ayomanor.

Ayomanor wasn't the only receiver on the field. Looking at the replay highlights (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiDYq3Vk_k8) Daniels had two receivers facing toward him with the defenders behind them. He could have taken the 6 yards or so easily and relatively safely. He never even looked at them. Stanford was on the 36 yard line. That makes it a 53 yard field goal. That is by no means a "gimme". Six more yards wouldn't have made it "easy" but would have been a heck of a lot more "makeable" for Kenney. I have no confidence he could kick a 53 yard field goal. 47 would still be a "reach". WF rushed only three and Daniels had a "clean" pocket. He had time to make a better read. Even if Daniels had "locked on" to Ayomanor he should have seen he was not open and throw the ball away. There were 28 seconds left when the ball was snapped. Stanford had time to run another play after an incomplete pass, call time-out and attempt a FG. Daniels is a Stanford student. None of this is beyond his comprehension.

You could argue that TT should not have trusted Daniels to make the right read because Daniels often doesn't. Stanford could have run the ball and attempted to get slightly better field position. However, if Stanford has to limit its play calling to plays that do not involve the QB making any "reads" at all, even simple ones, it will undoubtedly result in even worse production in general.

[Goose]

It was a bad call to let Daniels throw deep in that situation.  Daniels has accuracy problems.  Taylor has acknowledged that.  The offence was making its way down the field and was already in field goal range to force OT.  If they stayed the course for a few more plays, worst case they'd be in chip-shot range, and possibly would have opened something up for a realistic shot at the end zone.  Even with a highly accurate QB, a ball thrown 45-55 yards in the air is a low probability play.  With an inaccurate passer, it puts the game at risk and, in this case, lost it.   And while it wasn't a good pass, I don't really blame Daniels.  He was playing well in his comfort zone, so it was a bone-head move to ask him to win the game on one big heave.

TT didn't ask him to win the game on one big heave, or even anything remotely like that. He asked him to go out there and make the correct play, which in this case was NOT to throw it to a double-covered Ayomanor.

Ayomanor wasn't the only receiver on the field. Looking at the replay highlights (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiDYq3Vk_k8) Daniels had two receivers facing toward him with the defenders behind them. He could have taken the 6 yards or so easily and relatively safely. He never even looked at them. Stanford was on the 36 yard line. That makes it a 53 yard field goal. That is by no means a "gimme". Six more yards wouldn't have made it "easy" but would have been a heck of a lot more "makeable" for Kenney. I have no confidence he could kick a 53 yard field goal. 47 would still be a "reach". WF rushed only three and Daniels had a "clean" pocket. He had time to make a better read. Even if Daniels had "locked on" to Ayomanor he should have seen he was not open and throw the ball away. There were 28 seconds left when the ball was snapped. Stanford had time to run another play after an incomplete pass, call time-out and attempt a FG. Daniels is a Stanford student. None of this is beyond his comprehension.

You could argue that TT should not have trusted Daniels to make the right read because Daniels often doesn't. Stanford could have run the ball and attempted to get slightly better field position. However, if Stanford has to limit its play calling to plays that do not involve the QB making any "reads" at all, even simple ones, it will undoubtedly result in even worse production in general.

[old spanish trail]

Not to mention, Ayomanor was gassed.

[old spanish trail]

Not to mention, Ayomanor was gassed.

[Row80Critic]

It was a bad call to let Daniels throw deep in that situation.  Daniels has accuracy problems.  Taylor has acknowledged that.  The offence was making its way down the field and was already in field goal range to force OT.  If they stayed the course for a few more plays, worst case they'd be in chip-shot range, and possibly would have opened something up for a realistic shot at the end zone.  Even with a highly accurate QB, a ball thrown 45-55 yards in the air is a low probability play.  With an inaccurate passer, it puts the game at risk and, in this case, lost it.   And while it wasn't a good pass, I don't really blame Daniels.  He was playing well in his comfort zone, so it was a bone-head move to ask him to win the game on one big heave.

TT didn't ask him to win the game on one big heave, or even anything remotely like that. He asked him to go out there and make the correct play, which in this case was NOT to throw it to a double-covered Ayomanor.

Ayomanor wasn't the only receiver on the field. Looking at the replay highlights (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiDYq3Vk_k8) Daniels had two receivers facing toward him with the defenders behind them. He could have taken the 6 yards or so easily and relatively safely. He never even looked at them. Stanford was on the 36 yard line. That makes it a 53 yard field goal. That is by no means a "gimme". Six more yards wouldn't have made it "easy" but would have been a heck of a lot more "makeable" for Kenney. I have no confidence he could kick a 53 yard field goal. 47 would still be a "reach". WF rushed only three and Daniels had a "clean" pocket. He had time to make a better read. Even if Daniels had "locked on" to Ayomanor he should have seen he was not open and throw the ball away. There were 28 seconds left when the ball was snapped. Stanford had time to run another play after an incomplete pass, call time-out and attempt a FG. Daniels is a Stanford student. None of this is beyond his comprehension.

You could argue that TT should not have trusted Daniels to make the right read because Daniels often doesn't. Stanford could have run the ball and attempted to get slightly better field position. However, if Stanford has to limit its play calling to plays that do not involve the QB making any "reads" at all, even simple ones, it will undoubtedly result in even worse production in general.

Needless to say, Daniels could have made better decisions on that play, but TT put their best receiver some 50 yards away from the Daniels' throwing arm.  We know from the Syracuse presser that TT also tells Daniels where to throw, at least on occasion, and either way it's not crazy to think Daniels might try to throw to a future NFL receiver.  Kenny is 9 of 10 inside the 50, so a few more yards would have given them a very high chance of OT, with a low chance of breaking something open.  Instead, they opted for a low chance of breaking something open with no chance of going to OT.  Folks can blame Daniels if they want, but TT needs to understand his personnel and put them in the best position to win.  In my opinion, he didn't do that, so on that point we'll need to respectfully disagree.  As I said, you can argue individual play calls until you are blue in the face -- that's what forums are for after all :) -- but the undeniable fact remains unchanged:  TT has worst win-loss record in this history of the program.  Maybe he'll turn it all around and become the program's all-time most winning coach -- crazier things have happened -- but right now from where I'm sitting, I don't see any rational reason to think that might happen.  Just my two cents.

[Row80Critic]

It was a bad call to let Daniels throw deep in that situation.  Daniels has accuracy problems.  Taylor has acknowledged that.  The offence was making its way down the field and was already in field goal range to force OT.  If they stayed the course for a few more plays, worst case they'd be in chip-shot range, and possibly would have opened something up for a realistic shot at the end zone.  Even with a highly accurate QB, a ball thrown 45-55 yards in the air is a low probability play.  With an inaccurate passer, it puts the game at risk and, in this case, lost it.   And while it wasn't a good pass, I don't really blame Daniels.  He was playing well in his comfort zone, so it was a bone-head move to ask him to win the game on one big heave.

TT didn't ask him to win the game on one big heave, or even anything remotely like that. He asked him to go out there and make the correct play, which in this case was NOT to throw it to a double-covered Ayomanor.

Ayomanor wasn't the only receiver on the field. Looking at the replay highlights (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiDYq3Vk_k8) Daniels had two receivers facing toward him with the defenders behind them. He could have taken the 6 yards or so easily and relatively safely. He never even looked at them. Stanford was on the 36 yard line. That makes it a 53 yard field goal. That is by no means a "gimme". Six more yards wouldn't have made it "easy" but would have been a heck of a lot more "makeable" for Kenney. I have no confidence he could kick a 53 yard field goal. 47 would still be a "reach". WF rushed only three and Daniels had a "clean" pocket. He had time to make a better read. Even if Daniels had "locked on" to Ayomanor he should have seen he was not open and throw the ball away. There were 28 seconds left when the ball was snapped. Stanford had time to run another play after an incomplete pass, call time-out and attempt a FG. Daniels is a Stanford student. None of this is beyond his comprehension.

You could argue that TT should not have trusted Daniels to make the right read because Daniels often doesn't. Stanford could have run the ball and attempted to get slightly better field position. However, if Stanford has to limit its play calling to plays that do not involve the QB making any "reads" at all, even simple ones, it will undoubtedly result in even worse production in general.

Needless to say, Daniels could have made better decisions on that play, but TT put their best receiver some 50 yards away from the Daniels' throwing arm.  We know from the Syracuse presser that TT also tells Daniels where to throw, at least on occasion, and either way it's not crazy to think Daniels might try to throw to a future NFL receiver.  Kenny is 9 of 10 inside the 50, so a few more yards would have given them a very high chance of OT, with a low chance of breaking something open.  Instead, they opted for a low chance of breaking something open with no chance of going to OT.  Folks can blame Daniels if they want, but TT needs to understand his personnel and put them in the best position to win.  In my opinion, he didn't do that, so on that point we'll need to respectfully disagree.  As I said, you can argue individual play calls until you are blue in the face -- that's what forums are for after all :) -- but the undeniable fact remains unchanged:  TT has worst win-loss record in this history of the program.  Maybe he'll turn it all around and become the program's all-time most winning coach -- crazier things have happened -- but right now from where I'm sitting, I don't see any rational reason to think that might happen.  Just my two cents.

[Goose]

 Folks can blame Daniels if they want, but TT needs to understand his personnel and put them in the best position to win.  In my opinion, he didn't do that, so on that point we'll need to respectfully disagree.

Fair enough :-).

As I said, you can argue individual play calls until you are blue in the face -- that's what forums are for after all :) -- but the undeniable fact remains unchanged:  TT has worst win-loss record in this history of the program.  Maybe he'll turn it all around and become the program's all-time most winning coach -- crazier things have happened -- but right now from where I'm sitting, I don't see any rational reason to think that might happen.  Just my two cents.

You and I mostly agree here I think. Coaches are hired to win games. TT hasn't done much of that yet. I think most (probably all) of us on the Cardboard agreed that getting Stanford back to even a .500 team was going to take time. I think we have seen a few "good" trends but mostly a status quo of problems persisting on offense. Recruiting hasn't produced too many pleasant surprises either. QB play and OL play are still problems. IMO the receiver group also has some big issues with getting separation that exacerbates the QB problem. Like many here I am concerned that TT may be spreading himself too thin by also being the QB coach and Offensive Coordinator. Having other sets of eyes on the problem may help. TT can "run the show" (as Shaw did) while still having assistants that contribute.

IMO TT will get another year pretty much no matter what. Whenever the decision is made to change coaches there is no guarantee the next guy will be better. There is lots of uncertainty in college sports right now. This does work against finding a "new" coach that will do well in the future college football environment when we have no idea what that will be. I don't think there is a rush to do that yet. Maybe by the end of the season their will be, but I doubt it.

[Goose]

 Folks can blame Daniels if they want, but TT needs to understand his personnel and put them in the best position to win.  In my opinion, he didn't do that, so on that point we'll need to respectfully disagree.

Fair enough :-).

As I said, you can argue individual play calls until you are blue in the face -- that's what forums are for after all :) -- but the undeniable fact remains unchanged:  TT has worst win-loss record in this history of the program.  Maybe he'll turn it all around and become the program's all-time most winning coach -- crazier things have happened -- but right now from where I'm sitting, I don't see any rational reason to think that might happen.  Just my two cents.

You and I mostly agree here I think. Coaches are hired to win games. TT hasn't done much of that yet. I think most (probably all) of us on the Cardboard agreed that getting Stanford back to even a .500 team was going to take time. I think we have seen a few "good" trends but mostly a status quo of problems persisting on offense. Recruiting hasn't produced too many pleasant surprises either. QB play and OL play are still problems. IMO the receiver group also has some big issues with getting separation that exacerbates the QB problem. Like many here I am concerned that TT may be spreading himself too thin by also being the QB coach and Offensive Coordinator. Having other sets of eyes on the problem may help. TT can "run the show" (as Shaw did) while still having assistants that contribute.

IMO TT will get another year pretty much no matter what. Whenever the decision is made to change coaches there is no guarantee the next guy will be better. There is lots of uncertainty in college sports right now. This does work against finding a "new" coach that will do well in the future college football environment when we have no idea what that will be. I don't think there is a rush to do that yet. Maybe by the end of the season their will be, but I doubt it.

[Red80]

We had a very nice final drive going, advanced gradually down the field, and were already in FG range, which would have tied it. All we had to do was not fumble it, not throw an INT, and not get another major penalty. We were on the 36 yard line, 2nd and 10 w/ 28 seconds to go. 

After a pump that fooled absolutely no one, Daniels literally FLOATED the ball toward the left sideline but inbounds, intending it for Ayomanor. His throw was GROSSLY INACCURATE, approximately 6 yards beyond Ayomanor, who was double covered! I put a lot of the blame for this on TT for going to the well too often especially after Ayom had caught several on this drive. With two defenders covering Ayom, there must have been some other receiver open or single covered who could have gotten the first down on a completion and stopped the clock. IMO, that was a RIDICULOUS call and POOR execution. The ball was so far over Ayom's head that he actually gave up trying to get near it even before it was intercepted. The game was right there for us to win or at least tie. 



Color me not just frustrated but ANGRY!

Elic ran the wrong route on that final play. Agree that the call from Taylor was stupid, but it was Ayo who blew the play. #13 was supposed to cut to the sideline after the initial move, but instead ran straight upfield. Daniels threw the timing pattern to the spot where his receiver was supposed to be. I'm not sure if the pass would have been completed, but I don't think it would have been intercepted. 

You could tell by Daniels' reaction after the play that #13 ran the route incorrectly. 

Very unfortunate way to lose, and it spoiled what was a pretty good performance by Daniels.

[Red80]

We had a very nice final drive going, advanced gradually down the field, and were already in FG range, which would have tied it. All we had to do was not fumble it, not throw an INT, and not get another major penalty. We were on the 36 yard line, 2nd and 10 w/ 28 seconds to go. 

After a pump that fooled absolutely no one, Daniels literally FLOATED the ball toward the left sideline but inbounds, intending it for Ayomanor. His throw was GROSSLY INACCURATE, approximately 6 yards beyond Ayomanor, who was double covered! I put a lot of the blame for this on TT for going to the well too often especially after Ayom had caught several on this drive. With two defenders covering Ayom, there must have been some other receiver open or single covered who could have gotten the first down on a completion and stopped the clock. IMO, that was a RIDICULOUS call and POOR execution. The ball was so far over Ayom's head that he actually gave up trying to get near it even before it was intercepted. The game was right there for us to win or at least tie. 



Color me not just frustrated but ANGRY!

Elic ran the wrong route on that final play. Agree that the call from Taylor was stupid, but it was Ayo who blew the play. #13 was supposed to cut to the sideline after the initial move, but instead ran straight upfield. Daniels threw the timing pattern to the spot where his receiver was supposed to be. I'm not sure if the pass would have been completed, but I don't think it would have been intercepted. 

You could tell by Daniels' reaction after the play that #13 ran the route incorrectly. 

Very unfortunate way to lose, and it spoiled what was a pretty good performance by Daniels.

[martyup]

Many predicted Stanford to win 2-3 games this year based on the talent on the roster and the tough schedule.  However, as the games have played out it we have seen higher than expected talent from a number of freshmen players and some good improvement from some of our returning players.  So, IMO winning only 2 or 3 games is underachieving for this team.  We should have won the TCU and WF games and we'd be sitting on 4 wins with a good chance for a 5th and a puncher's chance for 6 wins.

As many of you know, I'm not one to be quick to blame a coach for losses.  But, I do not believe Troy Taylor is doing a good job as HC of this team.  He will most likely get a third season and I hope he turns it around and goes on to lead the Stanford Cardinal to bowl games again.  However, unless we pull out another win and look better in our losses, I would not be disappointed to see him terminated after this season.  Maybe the next coach won't do any better, but he can't do much worse.

[martyup]

Many predicted Stanford to win 2-3 games this year based on the talent on the roster and the tough schedule.  However, as the games have played out it we have seen higher than expected talent from a number of freshmen players and some good improvement from some of our returning players.  So, IMO winning only 2 or 3 games is underachieving for this team.  We should have won the TCU and WF games and we'd be sitting on 4 wins with a good chance for a 5th and a puncher's chance for 6 wins.

As many of you know, I'm not one to be quick to blame a coach for losses.  But, I do not believe Troy Taylor is doing a good job as HC of this team.  He will most likely get a third season and I hope he turns it around and goes on to lead the Stanford Cardinal to bowl games again.  However, unless we pull out another win and look better in our losses, I would not be disappointed to see him terminated after this season.  Maybe the next coach won't do any better, but he can't do much worse.

[CardinalSagehen]

Elic ran the wrong route on that final play. Agree that the call from Taylor was stupid, but it was Ayo who blew the play. #13 was supposed to cut to the sideline after the initial move, but instead ran straight upfield. Daniels threw the timing pattern to the spot where his receiver was supposed to be. I'm not sure if the pass would have been completed, but I don't think it would have been intercepted. 

You could tell by Daniels' reaction after the play that #13 ran the route incorrectly. 

Very unfortunate way to lose, and it spoiled what was a pretty good performance by Daniels.

You'll have to elaborate on how you know all of this. Maybe you've played or coached a lot of football (which I have not). 

I did not see Daniels trying to blame Ayomanor for anything, but maybe I missed it. He just looked dejected to me.

Also, the ball was way overthrown, not underthrown. Why would he overthrow it if Ayomanor was supposed to cut to the sideline rather than go upfield? Maybe you meant the opposite?

I just think you have the wrong take on this one. But even if you're right, it was by definition a bad throw that ignored the presence of the safety, which at best would have led to a 50/50 ball in a situation where we didn't want or need that.

[CardinalSagehen]

Elic ran the wrong route on that final play. Agree that the call from Taylor was stupid, but it was Ayo who blew the play. #13 was supposed to cut to the sideline after the initial move, but instead ran straight upfield. Daniels threw the timing pattern to the spot where his receiver was supposed to be. I'm not sure if the pass would have been completed, but I don't think it would have been intercepted. 

You could tell by Daniels' reaction after the play that #13 ran the route incorrectly. 

Very unfortunate way to lose, and it spoiled what was a pretty good performance by Daniels.

You'll have to elaborate on how you know all of this. Maybe you've played or coached a lot of football (which I have not). 

I did not see Daniels trying to blame Ayomanor for anything, but maybe I missed it. He just looked dejected to me.

Also, the ball was way overthrown, not underthrown. Why would he overthrow it if Ayomanor was supposed to cut to the sideline rather than go upfield? Maybe you meant the opposite?

I just think you have the wrong take on this one. But even if you're right, it was by definition a bad throw that ignored the presence of the safety, which at best would have led to a 50/50 ball in a situation where we didn't want or need that.

[CowboyIndian]

I think he was trying to throw it away and as has been the case in previous games, he didn't.

[CowboyIndian]

I think he was trying to throw it away and as has been the case in previous games, he didn't.

[MV72018]

Many predicted Stanford to win 2-3 games this year based on the talent on the roster and the tough schedule.  However, as the games have played out it we have seen higher than expected talent from a number of freshmen players and some good improvement from some of our returning players.  So, IMO winning only 2 or 3 games is underachieving for this team.  We should have won the TCU and WF games and we'd be sitting on 4 wins with a good chance for a 5th and a puncher's chance for 6 wins.

As many of you know, I'm not one to be quick to blame a coach for losses.  But, I do not believe Troy Taylor is doing a good job as HC of this team.  He will most likely get a third season and I hope he turns it around and goes on to lead the Stanford Cardinal to bowl games again.  However, unless we pull out another win and look better in our losses, I would not be disappointed to see him terminated after this season.  Maybe the next coach won't do any better, but he can't do much worse.

IMO, that's a reasonable take, Marty.

[MV72018]

Many predicted Stanford to win 2-3 games this year based on the talent on the roster and the tough schedule.  However, as the games have played out it we have seen higher than expected talent from a number of freshmen players and some good improvement from some of our returning players.  So, IMO winning only 2 or 3 games is underachieving for this team.  We should have won the TCU and WF games and we'd be sitting on 4 wins with a good chance for a 5th and a puncher's chance for 6 wins.

As many of you know, I'm not one to be quick to blame a coach for losses.  But, I do not believe Troy Taylor is doing a good job as HC of this team.  He will most likely get a third season and I hope he turns it around and goes on to lead the Stanford Cardinal to bowl games again.  However, unless we pull out another win and look better in our losses, I would not be disappointed to see him terminated after this season.  Maybe the next coach won't do any better, but he can't do much worse.

IMO, that's a reasonable take, Marty.

[76lsjumb]

C'mon.  We've got to give Coach Haase  Taylor a few seasons to turn things around.  Everyone knows it's all Coach Dawkins'  Shaw's fault.  We'll be playing in the tournament bowl games again in no time.  No way it will take more than eight ??? years...

[76lsjumb]

C'mon.  We've got to give Coach Haase  Taylor a few seasons to turn things around.  Everyone knows it's all Coach Dawkins'  Shaw's fault.  We'll be playing in the tournament bowl games again in no time.  No way it will take more than eight ??? years...