It's a W

But that should have been a much more decisive victory. Mistakes, penalties, defensive ineptitude in the first half, offensive one-dimensionality in the second half. If your Heisman-hopeful running back sets a school record and rushes for 301 yards and three TDs, you shouldn’t have a close game in the 4th quarter. But we did; and it took a Jet Toner FG with a bit over two minutes left to seal the deal. Why play that kind of football?

I’ll take the victory, but this was not a significant step forward for the program. Costello did fine and was a competent game-manager, but they didn’t really let him loose. Love accounted for 60% of Stanford’s total offense, which underlines the one-dimensionality. Tonight’s performance will not be enough to win against Utah and certainly won’t beat the Washington schools. Was Shaw keeping things so simple to avoid giving film to future opponents?

By Jeff Tarnungus on 09.30.17 5:27pm

More Positives Than Negatives

The game was closer than it should have been because of Shultz’s fumble, the inability of the defense in the first half to adjust to the Wildcat formation, and some bonehead penalties on 4th and long. But there were a lot of positives:
1. A nice run formation that doesn’t bunch everyone over the middle, but spreads them out and allows the QB to decide where to send Love. With a pitch that adds the QB as a blocker, it is difficult to defend.
2. Some new faces on the punt return team.
3. A fake punt – come on now, be honest, did anyone out there expect this from David Shaw?
4. Further maturation by Costello. He’s not there yet, but clearly has the talent.
5. Excellent halftime adjustments by the defensive coaches.
6. Great coverage by Holder in the second half.
7. Oh, and that guy Love truly deserves all the hype. When he was shedding tacklers and refusing to go down, it reminded you of Leonard Fornette (whom everyone in the SEC thought was the second coming when he did that).

Stanford may indeed lose more of the remaining games than they win, but they are at least fun to watch again.

By SU74 on 09.30.17 6:19pm

Hmmm

Your last statement has me worried. With seven games remaining, a 3-4 finish would put us at 6-6 for the year and barely bowl eligible. This would be Shaw’s worst regular season record and a huge drop-off from previous seasons. How would that square with having a Heisman-worthy running back, an elite secondary, a solid O-line and a host of other offensive weapons, including (hopefully) a promising young QB who broke all of Carson Palmer’s high-school records? If we cannot do better than 6-6 with that kind of personnel, then we have a systemic and/or coaching issue. I would not find such a team fun to watch.

And that’s my point above: the game was not particularly fun to watch. Yes, Bryce Love was fantastic and put on a mini-magic show with his long bursts and Houdini-style escapes in traffic. But our offense needs to be more than just that. There are other weapons that need to be developed and used. One forum member on California Golden Blogs said: "At the rate the Furd is using Love, he’ll be broke by the time of The Big Game." So we have Scarlett, a battery of tight ends, Wedington, Irwin, JJAW (until he got hurt) and Costello, who can also scramble. Why put all the load on Love? Even the announcer once said after Love was stuffed for a short gain: "One of these times, Costello will have to keep it on the read-option." He never did.

Then there was the Shaw-era tendency to let an outmatched opponent hang around and make it close. After Reid’s second interception, I really thought we would finally put them away. Leading 31-17 with the ball in great field position, we get the following series: first down: Costello tries to hit Irwin for a home-run, but fails (why a home run attempt? Why not just 15 to 20 yard chunks?); second down: Love gets 3 yards and moves the ball into ASU territory; third down: Love gets 4 yards, so it’s 4th and 3. Then Shaw dials up a successful fake punt. Brilliant. And we are suddenly at the ASU 28 and within FG range. Then it all goes pear-shaped. Love runs to the 10 yard-line, but Fanaika gets a bit handy on his block, and the whole thing is called back, making it 1st and 20 at the ASU 38. Love loses 3 yards on the next play; and Kaden Smith makes matters worse by getting flagged for a personal foul. Now it is 3rd and 38 on our own 44. What is the play-call? Ryan Burns on a run for no gain (Seriously?). Then we punt. Unnecessary penalties, questionable play-calling, lack of offensive creativity, and the door open for ASU to pull within a score, which they did in the early 4th quarter. Frankly, it wasn’t much fun watching that.

Now I am sure ASU fans had even less fun watching their defense get shredded by Love and their offense disintegrate in the second half, so in a relative sense, Stanford fans had the more enjoyable afternoon. But apart from Love, it wasn’t a pretty spectacle. As another CGB forum member put it watching the game in the 4th quarter: "Furd doesn’t have that much of a lead over ASU, even with Love at around 300 rushing yards (Jesus Christ)". My sentiments exactly.

By Jeff Tarnungus on 10.01.17 3:58am

Interesting

Of course Kal has their own set of worries, what with giving up 45 points to an Oregon team that was, for much of the game, 2nd and 3rd stringers on offense.

It was a passable, lackluster performance for Stanford against a team that they should have handled more easily, I agree with that. We don’t have quite enough seasoning yet at QB for the change to Costello to have a substantial impact yet I think. Yes, he looked sharper against UCLA, but his throws are still inconsistent — great arm, but needs more seasoning. He will get there, but it may take most of the remainder of the season to do so. And I think that is the key to the success of the team, due to the problem of being one dimensional and what that allows (demands, really) opposing defenses to do.

The rest of the schedule doesn’t look promising with this level of play. I don’t feel good about the two Washington schools, obviously. Nor Utah. Oregon looks better than I thought (or it could be that Cal’s defense is worse than I thought), but is beat up and will be playing at Stanford this year. Notre Dame is also much better than they were last year. Having said that, the two losses are, based on ESPN’s latest power rankings after this week, to 12 and 14 (Aztecs are 5-0) and so there’s that. I just don’t think that the team is consistent enough or balanced enough to feel confident about the remaining schedule. I mean we have a road game against Utah (I think a loss probably). Then we have the two Oregons — let’s be optimistic and assume we handle the Ducks at Stanford, so so that’s two wins. Then it’s the Washingtons and probably two losses. So going into Big Game we’re probably something like 5-5. And it’s hard to predict what will happen in those back to back rivalry games at the end against rivals who are improved (to varying degrees, it would appear, but still improved) and have scores to settle against us. I could see 7-5, 6-6, and 5-7 as all being quite possible, really. I mean, it’s possible that the team wins more than 7, but with the remaining schedule I don’t see it as being likely.

By Brendan Ross on 10.01.17 5:35am

Sobering prospects

After Costello’s brilliant start against UCLA, I conjured the belief that Costello could be to 2017 what Hogan was to 2012 or what Darnold was to USC’s stellar nine-game stretch to conclude the 2016 season. Maybe this belief is a stretch; but I still feel the talent on the team would warrant at least a 7-5 and maybe even a 9-3 regular season. Still, the schedule looks daunting; and that loss to SDSU definitely weighs in the balance and could mean the difference between bowl eligibility and being home for the holidays. If Costello had already played against the Aztecs, I feel we would be sitting at 4-1 and still be ranked in the top 25.

Frankly, I have a hard time gauging the relative strengths of the Pac-12 teams this year. When USC took us behind the woodshed, I was ready to declare them Bama’s biggest rival for the national championship, and I was not alone in that assessment. Then they struggled against Texas and got a dog fight out of Cal until the 4th quarter. So what does their 3-point defeat to the Cougars mean? Are the Cougars a legitimate CFP hopeful? Well, the Cougs really managed no more than Texas did, except this time there was no Darnold drive to equalize and send the game into overtime. And Texas did that in the Coliseum, while the Cougs had their significant home-field advantage (and Martin Stadium is a miserable place to be a visiting team). Cal’s excellent showing vs. the Trojans made everybody sit up and take notice, while the Ducks literally laid an egg in Tempe and looked quite soft and error-prone. What happens next? That tough Cal team rolls into Eugene and gets flattened by an injury-depleted Oregon. Washington is the only team that has been delivering as expected; but they also haven’t really played anybody. What about Colorado, some might say? Yes, the Dawgs steamrolled the Buffs, but the Buffs were then beaten by a UCLA team that many had written off as soft and wholly dependent on the arm of Josh Rosen. So where does this put the Cardinal? The transitive property in football cannot be applied; but if enough games are played, a picture of relative strengths emerges. My conclusions are the following:
1) USC is in a funk right now. They could pull out of this and emerge as dominant again; but for the time being, they are beatable and certainly not a top fifteen team nationally.
2) Wazzu looks very solid; but again, a three-point victory at home against a currently subpar USC team is not as impressive as it looks at first glance. #16 takes down #5. Brilliant on paper; but there were question marks all over this USC team after the first four games. Too bad for Stanford that Darnold’s best game of the year was against the Cardinal in the Coliseum.
3) Washington is probably the best bet at this point: I would put them number one in the Pac-12. But their impressive victory over Colorado dropped a bit in value after the Bruins took down the Buffs in the Rose Bowl. Apart from that win, the Huskies haven’t played anybody worth mentioning.
4) Where is Oregon? They are 4-1 and had an impressive showing vs. the Bears at home, but now they are riddled with injuries.
5) Utah is also a huge question: They are 4-0, and their most impressive victory was a 30-24 win against FBS #56 Arizona (2-2). The rest have been cream-puffs (North Dakota at 1-4, BYU at 1-4, SJSU at 1-5). Still, Rice-Eccles stadium is a tough venue, and so far Kyle Wittingham has owned David Shaw and Stanford.
6) And Cal? I had assumed they were back, but that may have been a premature assumption. Their early season victories are starting to look less impressive (North Carolina 1-4; Ole Miss 2-2 with a 66-3 loss to Bama this weekend; FCS Weber State, who Cal didn’t put away until the 4th quarter). Their tough showing against USC looks a bit less impressive after the events in Pullman and Eugene.

Have I forgotten any team that was considered a contender? I think we can safely exclude the two Arizona schools, Colorado, UCLA and Oregon State. Cal also has two conference losses, so they are unlikely to contend at this point. So where does Stanford sit amidst the remaining 6 teams? I would be inclined to slot them in at #4, behind UW, Wazzu and USC in that order. From a pure talent level, we should be able to handle Utah and Oregon. So if we can get by Notre Dame, that would point to an 8-4 regular season and most likely another Sun Bowl or Foster Farms bid. I would predict USC vs. UW in the title game, with UW winning to secure their second CFP spot in a row. But a lot can happen in the next 7 weeks; and maybe it is the way David Shaw described it in his pre-ASU press conference: there are no upsets in the Pac-12, because any team can beat any other team (with perhaps the single exception of Oregon State this year….). Going 8-4 would be nothing to write home about and certainly subpar in comparison to recent years; but the competition has gotten better, and we have regressed a bit.

By Jeff Tarnungus on 10.01.17 7:18am

I agree that there's a lot of flux

My guess is Wazzu drops a couple down the stretch, maybe at Utah and Seattle. Could also lose one of their other away games — I agree that they are much more manageable away from home than they are up in the Palouse, which worries me about Stanford’s game there (better Stanford teams have struggled up there against worse WSU teams). UW probably has the same issue they had last year in terms of schedule respect, either — looking at their remaining schedule it looks pretty likely that they go through with maybe a loss, like last year again (whether that will that be good enough for CFP depends on what Oklahoma does, probably). Cal and Oregon are improved but inconsistent. USC is having consistency issues as well, clearly, and it’s because Darnold is not nearly as consistent as he was last year — INTs are way up — remaining road games are at ND, Colorado and ASU, and I expect them to be very challenged in South Bend.

Overall I agree that the issue we face right now is that many other teams have improved and we have gotten slightly worse. We benefited a lot in the 2010-2015 period from a weaker conference overall, outside of Oregon — the only teams that are worse than they were then are Oregon (although better than last couple of years), ASU, UCLA and us, it seems — everyone else is either equally good/poor or improved to some degree, which makes it much more challenging for anyone in the conference to win 10+, and especially a team like us which plays SC and ND every year, unlike, say, UW. Still, they should be playing better with the talent on the team, regardless of the tougher competition.

By Brendan Ross on 10.01.17 7:45am

It's a sobering thought that the difference between 6-6 and 9-3 is just 1 guy - Solly thomas

As Stanford fans we were spoiled last year with that 9-3 record while the product on the field reflected a more 7-5ish team. The legend of Solomon Thomas will be rewritten after this season.

Part of that is Bryce love who is shredding McCaffrey’s records but with no visible talents on the DL the regression might be fast. This is a lesson for the rest of the pac-12 too that 1 good D-lineman can raise the ceiling of any team. It will be interesting to see how WSU fares without mata’afa and UW without vita vea and Gaines next year.

By layman on 10.01.17 8:19am

And by contrast

the UCLA game was enjoyable to watch once Costello was inserted into the game and the offense started to catch fire.

By Jeff Tarnungus on 10.01.17 4:54am

I single handily read this article.

By Cesar1 on 09.30.17 6:37pm