I'm not sure what we can take from this game

It was vanilla offensive gameplan and they played a lot of second unit guys on defense in the second half.

By Bored25 on 09.02.16 9:44pm

We learned that David Shaw will use the same game plan in every first game until he retires from football.

By Cardinal&Orange on 09.02.16 10:14pm

Disappointed that we shut shop in the 3rd quarter

I understand sleep walking through 4th quarter but in the 3rd quarter you had the chance to make a statement. Instead it opened the doors for further questions. Until I see the OL open more holes in the run game, I am not convinced this gameplan by the wildcats cannot be repeated.

The defense had its moments but I saw virtually no pass rush and you can have the world’s best secondary but if the QB has no pressure in his face then he can pick apart as the inexperienced QB from K-State showed. USC has to be licking its chops unleashing their WRs 1-1. The run defense was solid but still got gashed as the game wore on which is not promising for the 1-possession games we usually play esp on the road.

Ending on a happy note, we can’t judge the book by its cover and so this was a nice preparation game and will remind the team of the ways to go before being elite.

By layman on 09.02.16 10:48pm

USC is going to be licking bruises later tonight...

By ADPATERSON on 09.03.16 8:14am

boy were you ever right

By nickdempsey on 09.11.16 12:38pm

Hard to really know anything this early on.

KSU may very well be a solid team, which would make this a much more impressive win. Or they could be terrible. As last season taught us, early games really mean nothing.

Some thoughts:
-Jake Bailey, holy shit. Might be Shannon Turley’s finest work yet.
-Stanford was mighty predictable and mighty boring for a good chunk of the game. Gotta be diverse going forward, especially since this D probably won’t be this good.
-Quentin Meeks is a star.
-If Stanford can get that kinda production out of Watkins and be deep at DLine, lookout. Hope Philips is ok
-College football is so stupidly binary in its judgment of wins and losses, but it means all that matters is Stanford came out on top today. No NW repeat.

By Tim Eckert-Fong on 09.02.16 11:39pm

It's a win

Not much of the playbook used. That’s typical for Shaw’s early season games. He doesn’t like to open the playbook early. Offense looked capable, but contained. Defense looked very good, but hard to tell against K-State. But, it’s a win. 1-0 is a better start than 0-1!

By Brendan Ross on 09.03.16 3:33am

Are we happy with this game vs. the Wildcats?

Compared to last year, yes.

But there were shades of past bad habits and potential weaknesses that could come back to haunt us as we enter the thick of the schedule.

1) Without wanting to take anything away from K State’s defensive efforts, the Cardinal had an opportunity leading 17-0 to run away with the game. But we showed just the right amount of conservative play and lack of killer instinct to allow the Wildcats to hang around and make a game of it. How many times have we seen this in the past? The Cardinal rushes out to an early lead and appears to be set for a dominant victory, only to let up and allow a good opponent to claw its way back into it (and this simile is apt when the opponent is a pack of Wildcats). This is the "playing-not-to-lose" trap that should belong to Shaw’s past.

2) The O-line, at least in the second half, was reminiscent of the 2014 unit that did not gel until late in the season; and we all know how that season went. Lots of defensive battles with tight losses and an 8-5 campaign (with three of those wins coming once the O-line had found its footing).

3) Shaw may not want to open up the playbook this early, but there are also vanilla passing plays, play-options, fakes, etc. Pounding McCaffrey into the center of the line for minimal yards (20 carries for 50 yards excluding the two TD flashes) hearkens back to Old Shaw. And at present (see 2 above), we appear to have an O-line that won’t allow that strategy to work. Fortunately, McCaffrey is elusive enough to turn that crowbar type of offense into a couple of TDs.

On the positive side, the defense looked much better than advertised, though there were some wobbles and fatigue in the second half. How will they look facing up to the beefy front line of the Trojans in two weeks’ time? And how will our duly praised secondary fare against USC’s fleet-footed wide receivers? Week three will be a much better test of the Cardinal D.

Burns looked really good in the first half and showed what he is capable of. His hand-off miscue that led to a fumble and the conservative play-calling in the second half did not allow him to show much after the break. It’s no secret that Burns is not the mobile, elusive scrambler that Hogan was. This made Hogan a viable rushing threat when the box was stuffed to stop McCaffrey. How much will we miss this safety valve as the season progresses?

Of note: Stanford punted once in the first half and four times in the second half. Yes, Bailey did a great job. But it’s not a good sign for your offensive production when you are praising the heroic feats of your punter. It’s better to have a great punter who rarely takes the field.

All in all, a far better start than in 2015. But the murderous schedule ahead means that the team will need to raise the bar several notches to register Ws against the likes of USC, UCLA and Washington. I think they are up to it; and Shaw was certainly holding back. But there is some vestigial concern I harbor thinking back to 2014: in that season, Shaw seemed unwilling to open up the offense, perhaps because he had little faith in the O-line and far too much faith in the D. Will he replicate that pattern until he has confidence in the O-line? Clearly one difference this year is we have a seasoned McCaffrey in the backfield who is a difference-maker vs. the true freshman McCaffrey in 2014. He is capable of breaking things even if the play-calling is vanilla. Take those two explosive TD plays away, and it’s a 13-12 defeat, which is a score that looks a lot like 2014. If our defense is truly the real deal (and that will be proven in the next number of weeks), that’s a huge improvement over the bend-don’t-break squad of 2015. But I hope it doesn’t mean Shaw feels comfortable riding that unit to a series of one possession games that tend to go the wrong way when the clock runs out (USC, Notre Dame, Utah in 2014). I trust Shaw will use the bye week productively and work on some of the execution errors and the O-line’s issues. Then it’s Troy, and the tenor of the 2016 campaign could be on the line.

By Jeff Tarnungus on 09.03.16 6:24am

One thing -> 2 points

Take those two explosive TD plays away, and it’s a 13-12 defeat

First, one can analyze history, but not undo it.

Second, isn’t the explosive play the essence of McCaffrey’s lethality? You the ball in his hands 25+ times a game not to wear down the opponent, a la Gerhart/Gaffney/Taylor, but for those times when the defense makes a mistake or the OL executes perfectly and McC busts a long one.

Other than that nitpicking, a good critique.

By Cardinal&Orange on 09.03.16 7:29am

Agree

As I noted above: "He is capable of breaking things even if the play-calling is vanilla". That is his essence, which is clearly not "vanilla". And that is why we prevailed; whereas with a less explosive, elusive back, we might have seen that grind ’em out loss in the final seconds.

My primary concern: there was a bit too much Old Shaw in phases of the game. We should have been able to put up 30+ points on K State. In fact, give McCaffrey the punt return back, and we did put up 30+ points. So maybe I am concerned for no reason. We will know more on the 17th of September.

By Jeff Tarnungus on 09.03.16 8:16am

INSIGHT: Shaw in a 28 game season right now; 1 down. Playoffs, Natl Title in 2017

Ok, here’s the insight of the week, so that you (spoiled fans) don’t despair after a workman-like 26-13 victory at home to open — recall last year, or ten years ago, left for dead before Harbaugh.

INSIGHT: I have yelled at Shaw some times also for just pounding the rock. But he is 54W-14L against a TOUGH shedule — nine Pac12 teams plus NDAM, EVERY year. With three Pac12 Champ rings the last four years. When has Stanford EVER done that (post WW2)? When? (History majors?)
Shaw used this game against a solid D as an extended scrimmage. He was FORCING the OLine to get their act together. Last year they DID, despite looking really bad @NORW. We held NORW to 16 pts — the OLine did not do their job in that game.
Consider: We are in better shape today than after Game 1 in 2015, and last year was a GREAT year — best finish (#3) ever for Cardinal since WW2. But, we face a tougher schedule in 2016 than in 2017.
GROK this: Shaw has the nucleus now for a run at the Playoffs in 2017, with McCaff back for a Heisman and a LOT of talent. Shaw can’t say it now, but he knows he has a Natl Title contender in 2017, with a Mazzerati wearing #5. In his mind he is playing a 28 game season. One down, a win.
Shaw is building a dynasty to 2030; he is not going back to the NFL. He has 5star QBs lined up thru 2022. This is his dream job; the Univ just upped his contract.
Comprenden, Companeros?

By ADPATERSON on 09.03.16 8:16am

Your optimism is infectious, ADP

But why let an extended scrimmage get to 19-13 in the 4th quarter after leading 17-0? In the words of the great Cardinal blogger himself at 8:48 PM yesterday in the SB Nation game thread: "Playing not to lose… old habits". And those are bad habits.

I also recall we were talking about 2014 being a warm up for our 2015 national championship run. That might have been, but, as it turned out, fell apart against another troupe of Wildcats.

Also, is there any guarantee McCaffrey will return for 2017? I would say "yes", because he’s old school and wants his degree. But what we do know is that he IS here in 2016; and despite the murderous road schedule, we have to make a run this year, not when those same contests revert to the home field in 2017. How about this: two NC Championships in a row? Dream big!

By Jeff Tarnungus on 09.03.16 8:35am

Agree 100% With All of Jeff's Comments in Posts Above

We actually could have lost that game. The fumble recovery for a TD…..that wasn’t, due to less than an inch, plus those aggressive non-calls on Holder in the end zone could have added 14 points for K-State. McCaffrey’s second TD at the end of the game was more a function of K-State trying to play the ball at that point trying to get a turnover rather than just stopping McCaffrey – which they had little problem doing up the middle. Take away that score and we win 19-13. Thanks to good punting and some good fortune. And why? Because of old Shaw or first game Shaw or whatever. It is not like Burns did not show that he could handle an offense. Heck, he was great. We have missed the National Championship due to one loss too many far too many times to teams in games where we should win. OK………….we got the win and that is all that matters. And Shaw’s record over the years is admirable. But playing not to lose continues to be Shaw’s Achilles Heal ………….one which I thought that been permanently surgically repaired in the last Rose Bowl.

Perhaps K-State turns out to be this year’s Northwestern and wins 9+ games. So what?! They are still a far inferior team than the Cardinal and we almost let them beat us at home.

Burns was a revelation and certainly the team, and Shaw, learned something from this game. Two weeks until the Trojans come to town.

Time to re-load and get ready. We have some work to do.

By hoyaparanoia on 09.03.16 9:09am

After some cooldown I can't help but feel that shaw scripted this

The playcalling and game preparation for the cardinal have usually been excellent in the first half even in the 3 yds and cloud of dust days of 2012-13. Its when the other team makes adjustments that shaw is sometimes too stubborn and riding the defense to hold the other team. I thought he had learned his lesson last year when he trusted the offense to break the ice in the 3rd quarter and put it away but seems like he trusts the D more this year.

I totally think that we shut off the playbook after that fumble because shaw knew the D would hold them and the only way they would lose is if they make some turnovers off some aggressive playcalls (aka playing not to lose). So instead he shortened the game by running the football (classic stanford!). It didnt help that we couldnt get a first down in 3 straight series and also somebody else mentioned that we didnt run a lot of power (our staple play) in the second half and instead went single back sets.

More than that, I feel coach shaw wanted to instill team identity by seeing them in close game action. It is easy to think that the team would carry over the confidence of a blowout to SC but the ugly style win would motivate the players to play better and there is no coach who emphasizes the "us vs world" mentality as shaw. Even last year in wins against SC, UCLA, Cal our second half identity was to "run through their souls" (Garnett ’15) and we took most of the shots in the first half. So this was a nice litmus test and perfectly scripted by coach shaw

By layman on 09.03.16 10:56am