This wasn’t the David Shaw-Chip Kelly matchup of old. There were no Heisman hopefuls leading either team, nor championship dreams on the line. UCLA came in 1-5 and Stanford came in as the Ship of Theseus. Needless to say both teams entered unranked, and left it even more unranked. Collectively having four straight turnovers on downs will do that.
It would be pretty easy to blame Jack West for this loss. The third string quarterback made his first career start for Stanford, after only taking a handful of snaps to date. He looked skittish out there, holding the ball far too long and short-arming throws.
West’s lack of an internal clock and the patchwork offensive line allowed 7 sacks to a Bruin front that had recorded 9 all season. “Kind of expect three young guys playing up front and a young quarterback starting his first game, but that’s not an excuse,” said Coach Shaw. “There were times we thought we had enough time to get it off and didn’t get it off.” West went just 15-32 against the nation’s second worst pass defense.
But Jack West didn’t let the Bruins run for 263 yards. Adjusting for sacks, they averaged better than 7 yards per carry. Joshua Kelley repeatedly gashed the Cardinal, taking advantage of several big holes and finishing runs effectively. He had two runs of more than 50 yards, and finished the night with 176 on the ground.
The Stanford defense is fairly depleted, particularly at linebacker. But this is more or less the same unit that shut down Washington two weeks ago. They put pressure on Husky QB Jacob Eason, forcing him into rushed reads and errant throws. It didn’t have the same effect against Bruin signal-caller Dorian Thompson-Robinson.
DTR was shifty in the pocket, extending plays and making the Cardinal defense pay with his arm and his legs. By the time they did sack him, the game was no longer in doubt. He took off 10 times for 92 yards, including a 39 yard scamper. “I guess they call him X factor, quick, athletic, explosive,” said Shaw. “You give Chip Kelly a guy like that and we’ve seen that movie before.”
The first drive of the game for the Cardinal looked promising. They dialed up some easy reads to get West comfortable, and it worked. He started with a 4 yard keeper, before hitting Wedington on a pair of short completions that allowed him to run after the catch. A 30 yard connection put them in Bruin territory before the drive stalled, and Jet Toner kicked a 42 yard field goal for a 3-0 start.
On the ensuing kickoff Toner went down with what appeared to be a right leg injury. It was a harbinger of bad news for the Cardinal. The Bruins’ first two drives ended in touchdown tosses to Kyle Philips, and the Stanford offense went dormant. After West and company gained 51 yards on the game’s first drive, they wouldn’t gain another 51 total until late in the third quarter, needing 9 possessions to do so. This was against a defense allowing more than 500 per contest.
The highlight of the game for the Cardinal came late in the first quarter. UCLA was up 14-3 and appeared to be rolling, when the home defense stiffened up and forced a punt. The 31 year old Wade Lees dropped back to kick, but was met by two charging defenders in his face almost immediately. Freshman Spencer Jorgensen blocked the punt, sending the ball careening into the end zone where Brycen Tremayne dived on it. For Jorgensen, it was his first time recording a statistic of any sort. Ryan Sanborn made his first career extra point to narrow the deficit to 14-10.
UCLA responded before halftime, going 85 yards in just 6 plays for a 1 yard DTR scramble to push it to 21-10. In total, they ripped off 20 unanswered to push the lead to 34-10 before a garbage time answer from Stanford made it a final score of 34-16. In their final drive, Jack West hit Simi Fehoko on a 35 yard bomb to get the offense into scoring position. Cam Scarlett put the finishing touches on the drive by flipping through the air and only just breaking the goal line before landing awkwardly on the turf.
One game after a career day, Cam Scarlett had just 13 carries for 34 yards and that acrobatic touchdown. West had only 143 passing yards, with a team-leading 48 going to Wedington. Thomas Booker led the defense with 9 tackles and 1.5 tackles for loss.
DTR was 21-34 for 192 yards, with 2 touchdowns and a pick to Paulson Adebo. He connected with Philips 10 times for 100 yards and both passing scores. This was the first time UCLA got the better of Stanford since 2008. It puts an end to a series-record 11 straight Cardinal wins, and marks the first David Shaw loss to any UC school.
The Cardinal dropped to 3-4, needing to go at least 3-2 the rest of the way to make a bowl game. They’re in action next weekend at home against Arizona. As to whether Davis Mills or KJ Costello might be ready to go for that one? “We’ll see,” said Shaw.
Comments
Thank You For The Quick Game Write Up
That was as bad as I have seen Stanford play in a very long time, against a fairly week team. While I have some sympathy for West, we have faced a couple of true Freshmen QBs making essentially their first starts who were very very good against us. West has been with the team for a year and a half. I would have expected more production out of him despite all of the O line and other issues. Historically, many of our QBs have looked rough in their first game action. Need to fix that. Injuries do happen. That was a Nunes like performance.
On defence, while we did not give up many huge passing plays, we got gashed by the UCLA QB’s great mobility. That guy is elusive … and fast. While we were able to put some pressure on him, he ran away from it – sometimes downfield and sometimes completing passes near the first down marker. We played off receivers who caught quick passes and got yards after the catch. #2 was unstoppable (by us). And the runs gashed us.
I could make some micro comments about playcalling, but it made no difference in the outcome.
The only question remaining this year is what Shaw takes away from it and what he then does about it. But I will continue to watch the games (assuming I can find a stream).
By hoyaparanoia on 10.18.19 8:54am
Was that the "stubborn" Shaw everyone has been complaining about?
Let me start by saying that I didn’t start watching until late in the 2nd quarter after it was 14-10. But at that point, they pointed out that West had been sacked 5 times already?
Based on what I saw and got via stats, it seemed that Shaw came out with a game plan to throw the ball on a defense that has been lit up in the passing game. It should have been obvious by the 2nd quarter, West was not able to execute that game plan. Shaw should have immediately gone to a run heavy format only being down by 4 points. Yet, it felt like Shaw kept insisting that West should/could throw the ball.
In the past, I’ve rejected that Shaw has been "stubborn" bad. But last night, I finally saw that. Forget that the pass heavy game plan was a terrible choice for a kid making his first start, it was obvious as soon as I saw West drop back to pass, that he was overwhelmed. On some level, I can appreciate that Shaw wanted to have faith in the kid, but I can’t get over the fact that Shaw came out with that game plan to begin with. What was our first play, hand-off up the middle? What was our second play ,hand-off up the middle? No. Jack run (was he flushed?) and then two passes.
The box score shows West throwing the ball 32 times and Scarlet only getting 13 carries? facepalm We were only down 21-10 at the half. Plenty of time to run the ball. It was obvious to me that West was not able to carry the team, but Shaw would not stop calling pass plays.
I can live with the loss, but the ridiculous game plan to try and sling it for 4 quarters is what is most frustrating.
It appears we played Zone and that was a huge mistake. Kevin Phillips on UCLA was all day, every day, and twice on Tuesdays. Obviously the zone was there to stop DTR from running, and it didn’t work at all. He still ran.
Once again, we got killed by our safeties. Once again, we give up a huge run for a TD that should have been stopped by the Safety. Safety play is what saved us against UW, this time, they were 20 yards off the line when Felton gets a hand-off. Stanford did not scout them correctly.
As good as Shaw & Co. did against UW, they compensated for it against UCLA. Two-steps forward, five steps back. For the love of god, Shaw, run the ball. Even more so to protect your unprepared QB.
By Blackjoy on 10.18.19 11:45am
Agree On Both The Offence and Defence Points Made
Shaw gave up potentially 4 more points on the initial drive when he had West pass on 2nd down and 1. He does this alot, often shooting for the end zone with other QBs. Why can’t we just get the first down, move closer, and try to score? An incomplete pass led to an OBVIOUS run up the middle that got stuffed. That is a micro comment, but certainly is representative of the problems with playcalling.
Yes. The UCLA QB forced our defense to make sure that he could not escape and eat up ground…..leaving many open lanes for runners and receivers. And yet, he still ran amok when things broke down.
By hoyaparanoia on 10.18.19 5:55pm
Yeah, West wasn't good...
…but you can see he might be eventually. The defense just didn’t show up, and when West did make a throw someone dropped it.
By atg_commish on 10.18.19 9:52am
West was just trying to do what was asked
He’s definitely not there yet but MORE importantly our coaching staff should have had enough vision to recognize it in practice. As much as Coach Shaw boasts about "not changing what they do" the Cardinal needed to change everything yesterday. Maybe come out running the wildcat, jet sweeps or flea flickers… I would have appreciated more unpredictable plays and more plays to help West get settled…
I think/hope the lesson learned for the coaching staff is: trying to fit a system down your teams throat does not always work(especailly when compounded w injuries. As much as it may go against the Cardinal football philosophy, sometimes u have to change what you do
By Slot_Man22 on 10.18.19 3:28pm
Yes, creativity would have been nice
Wildcat, misdirection, sweep — anything but what wasn’t working.
In 2015, Baylor lost their two top QBs and their most potent wide receiver. This situation arose just before their bowl game against North Carolina in the Russel Athletic Bowl. Rather than trying to force a passing game, which had been their strength all season, they put multiple running backs in the wildcat and just ran straight at the Tar Heels. It worked, and they won 49-38. The game plan should suit the personnel you have, not the personnel you wish you had. Shaw should have known that West was not ready to shred the Bruin defense with his arm. How about some creative sweeps with Wedington, some Wildcats with Cam, some misdirection with West and Carr? Or, maybe, a Parkinson pass to West in the end zone?
By Jeff Tarnungus on 10.18.19 3:57pm
I couldn't watch the game after halftime
The outcome was not in doubt and there was no joy in Stanford-ville. How could a QB who’s been at Stanford for 2 years be that unprepared? And as others have said, with the passing game utterly failing, why stick with it?
When other teams go to a QB with no experience, they can do fine because they give them a simple playbook they can work from—not hugely different from what they ran in high school. But no, Stanford has to go with the whole pro playbook every time, it seems…
By worldblee on 10.18.19 3:45pm
Another idea similar to Baylor's
What if we hadn’t played a QB at all? Put running backs in the wildcat with two blockers in the backfield and three tight ends. Pound the rock. Wear down the defense. A lot easier on the offensive lineman to block straight up. Parkinson was double covered all night and our other receivers could not get any separation against the Pac 12’s worst pass defense. Problem is, our defense could not stop a team with good but not great backs, no tight end and one good receiver. Our linebacking is decimated by injuries and our safeties are plain bad.
Watching Ohio State take apart Northwestern tonight (38-3 at last check) reveals how bad Stanford is this year compared to top teams.
By gaffman on 10.18.19 8:37pm
Actually
Baylor did exactly what you are proposing: they simply pulled the QB, put their running backs in the wildcat and threw all their blockers in one concerted direction. It was a bold strategy for a Big 12 team that lived and died by the pass. But necessity is the mother of invention. Baylor rushed for 645 yards in that game, with running backs Johnny Jefferson (299 yards), Devin Chafin (156 yards) and Terence Williams (97 yards) repeatedly running from the wildcat. Their only healthy QB, Chris Johnson, was 7/12 for 82 yards.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/recap?gameId=400852724
By Jeff Tarnungus on 10.19.19 3:18am
Buckeyes winning at Northwestern now 52-3
By gaffman on 10.18.19 8:40pm
Tavita Prichard has to go
Jack West came to Stanford as a 4 star recruit, with almost 5,000 passing yards in his prep career. Tenth ranked pro passer in high school. Even though he was hurt in his freshman year, he no doubt went to practices, read the playbook, and was a member of the team. Unfortunately, his quarterback coach and offensive coordinator during the entire time he’s been at Stanford has been Tavita Prichard. When Costello was hurt in the Oregon game, Mills became the quarterback for Oregon State and Washington. That made West the primary backup. So Prichard has had a month to get West ready in case he had to take over for Mills. There is no excuse for what we all suffered through on Thursday. West was woefully unprepared to be a college quarterback and the blame falls entirely upon his quarterback coach and offensive coordinator, Tavita Prichard.
As for the defense, it just seemed like no one on the coaching staff paid any attention to the film of the UCLA quarterback. Even the TV commentators noticed by halftime that he could not for some reason throw to his left. So instead of taking the juke step to the left, you stay with the receivers cutting across the middle. And even though I agree that Stanford’s safeties are weak and particularly slow to react, where were the inside linebackers? A three/four defensive front should not allow long runs up the middle by anyone.
When you weren’t covering your eyes during this debacle, you could see that West, the linebackers, and safeties constantly looking towards the sidelines for what to do. That should never happen with the time they had to prepare for this game.
By SU74 on 10.18.19 9:26pm
This is on Shaw, not Pritchard.
I’m not convinced Pritchard is incapable of doing his job. Last year, against WSU Stanford put up 40 some points. With competent line and a QB, our offense has been fine. My issue with this game was not the play calling, but the whole offensive strategy. That buck stops with Shaw. It also was incumbent upon Shaw to see that West was not up to the task with live bullets. I get that Shaw wanted to have faith in West, but jesus, run the effing ball, you just got 150 yards on UW.
On a side note, I was happy to see UW lose now that we are totally out of contention for the North.
By Blackjoy on 10.19.19 9:26pm
Agreed
Pritchard has no business being an offensive coordinator at a Power 5 football program. He is 32 years old, has never coached anywhere else, knows only the Harbaugh-Shaw system and has not shown any ability to develop players. Shaw is the de facto offensive coordinator, and that is part of the problem. Shaw needs to bring in a slew of fresh coaching blood, beginning with the OC position.
The new OC at USC, Graham Harrell, is only two years older than Pritchard, but has coached at Oklahoma State (2009), played in the NFL (2010-2013, Packers and Jets), was WR coach at WSU (2014-2015), served as offensive coordinator at North Texas (2016-2018) and got his big chance at a Power Five program beginning this season. If he performs successfully for the Trojans, he will be poached for a head-coaching job. Pritchard, by contrast, could not even get an OC job at any comparable university. But Shaw appears to be committed to him.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 10.19.19 3:36am