1. The misery ends, for now. The last two full seasons have been the losingest and most joyless seasons for Stanford football in the last 15 years. There's some relief that this season is over but it's tempered by the realization that there's scant reason to think there can be a significant turnaround in the foreseeable future. Any relief is also tempered for me when I think about what I always think about when a Stanford football season ends - the players who played their last game at Stanford. There are a lot of guys who had a pretty miserable end to their Stanford experience. That's sad.
2. Last night's game was the cherry on top for a shit sundae. At least players fought for the seniors. A 2.4 yard per play differential is horrible (significantly less competitive than even the Oregon State game, for instance) but it's far more competitive than what we saw against Utah and Cal. Surpassing the worst games in Stanford history shouldn't be the standard, but I'm glad the team didn't roll over. Sadly, this team fighting added up to one of the worst teams in the country this year. 3-9 tells a vivid story all its own but I don't think totally captures it. On the season, we didn't finish top 100 in any of these most major categories: scoring offense, scoring defense, total offense, total defense, yards per play, yards per play allowed, rushing offense, or rushing defense. We weren't top 80 in any of the major passing stats on offense. The passing defense (#82 in yards per attempt allowed and #76 in passer rating allowed) was the team's biggest strength this year. That's the kind of ineptitude you really need to re-read and dwell on to let sink in just how bad that is to have your team's strengths still be well below-average. We sucked comprehensively in 2021.
3. Stanford's defense gave up 7.2 yards per play to the Domers, the fourth worst of our season and the third best of Notre Dame's season. Over the course of the season this would be the #126 defense in the nation. On offense, Stanford mustered 4.8 yards per play. Here's an amazingly pathetic stat: this is the best the offense has done in the last five games. Over the course of the season an offense at the level of productivity of last night's Stanford offense would be #118 in the nation, yet that was the best we've been on a yards per play basis in over a month. As Brock Huard said on the telecast, the Stanford offense is broken. By the way, the clarity and reality-based announcing was a breath of fresh air. The media need to stop pretending the emperor has any clothes.
4. While the fight was futile, one thing last night jumped out as a silver lining: the defense's 4.8 yards per carry allowed is the stingiest anybody has been against Notre Dame in the last five games and almost a yard better than our season average. That's the second time in three weeks post-scheme change in which the run defense has been solid against a tough opponent, though Notre Dame's run game is nowhere near as imposing as Oregon State's. Alas, we coupled this performance with a pass defense performance that allowed a 167.33 passer rating and 9.5 yards per attempt. This was Notre Dame's third best yards per attempt game, second best passing yardage game, and sixth best passer rating game and was bottom three for Stanford in each respect. This continues the theme of our breakdown in pass defense in November after it having been a relative strength of the team all year. It also continues a theme that's bedeviled us for years: the defense is so weak that when we identify a weakness and coach/scheme/make a point of emphasis to correct it, that often appears to have the effect of playing whack-a-mole. We seem incapable of being simultaneously effective in both aspects of defense.
5. The relative silver lining on offense was the passing game. The passing stats were middle-of-the-road by Stanford 2021 standards, which is a pretty good showing considering the strength of Notre Dame's defense (#25 in yards per attempt allowed, #17 in passer rating allowed, #7 in sacks). The enemy gets a vote and Notre Dame is a formidable enemy for a passing offense to face. We battled. Were it not for Wilson's extremely brutal game we likely would have given Notre Dame's pass defense one of its stiffer tests. In contrast, the run game went out with a whimper. 2.5 yards per carry is sub-par even by our standards and the second stingiest Notre Dame has been this year.
6. While we know McKee can sling it, handling the pocket remains a massive issue for him, demonstrated this time by the the sack/fumble, which was on him. In terms of the passing efficiency, McKee's stats benefited tremendously by individual greatness by Yurosek (the long touchdown, the one-handed grab, etc.) and were harmed tremendously by Wilson's no good, horrible, very bad day. Given that it's a bit hard for me to disentangle variables and assess McKee's day. Total QBR thought he was horrible (119th of 121 QBs nationally). PFF thought he was good (76.2 grade, second best of any starter on either side of the ball). Hard to make sense of that discrepancy. Regardless, McKee's season had a very poor trajectory that leaves him an enigma heading into 2022. Overall he was good for a freshman (51 of 127 QBs nationally in Total QBR, seventh in the Pac-12 in essentially a tie with Chase Garbers for 7th/8th) but it was a tale of two seasons. After a beginning of his year that evoked Andrew Luck comparisons, he had one good game in his last five and had a miserable 4 touchdown to 7 interception ratio in that span. In the final analysis his freshman year appears worse than those of Luck, Kevin Hogan, and KJ Costello, and of course McKee played at a much older stage of physical and emotional development. I'm less confident in what we have in McKee than I was a month ago. It's hard to escape that he's essentially our only hope for relevance for the foreseeable future (a very slim hope given the state of the program around him) so hopefully next season is Good McKee from start to finish.
7. On offense, aside from the obvious (Yurosek), it's hard to identify good performances in a game like this, sadly a theme for us in recent weeks. I can't call Jones' game "good" but it reminded me of games in the Teevens' years where we had to find silver linings for 35 yard rushing performances. In this case Jones did get us three first downs and fought with heart for that touchdown. As the announcers said, his 2021 was a nightmare and it's sad to think about the level of success he had in 2020 compared to 2021. I hope next year is much more enjoyable for him. By the way, I was heartsick that Sanders got his passing touchdown moment of glory taken away by the bogus call on Jones.
8. The defense had some guys battle. Reid capped off a great final (it seems 😢) campaign by fighting through the whistle. He had three first down run stops and a half tackle for loss. It's a shame that the offsides on 4th and 4 when he timed the delay of game, extending the drive into a final touchdown drive, will potentially be the last memory of his football career. He had a really good last year. Judging from Shaw's post-game remarks it seems like it's the end of the line at Stanford. That's going to leave big shoes to fill. As Shaw said post-game, we really missed McGill this season. That's our playmaker. The interception was the kind of play you don't really see Stanford players making much of the last half decade. It's not an accident he had interceptions in each of his games back. He has a knack for the ball. While he had bad moments yesterday, he also gave us a stop on a short passing play, a third quarter tackle of Mayer that helped force a punt, and a tackle for loss.
9. Sanborn continued his streak of good punting once the season was lost and the games were uncompetitive. In this one he had net punts of 45, 49 (inside the 15), 41 (would have been 53 but had to re-punt because of a penalty), 44, 48 (pinning Notre Dame at the 3), 42 (inside the 20), 52 (inside the 20), and 51. Incredible game. One of the best punting games you'll ever see. This monster game to cap off a good end of the season for him puts us at #78 in net punting on the year. Obviously that's crappy, especially by our standards, but we weren't top 100 essentially all year. Elsewhere on the special teams front, the frequency of penalties on special teams is a black mark on Alamar's resume.
10. Game balls: Yurosek, McGill, Sanborn, Turner
11. Attention now turns to what changes will be made this off-season to stabilize this sinking ship. They need to be very significant. It remains to be seen how significant they will be. Personally I think we will see coaching staff changes and scheme changes. But there is a wide range in how significant it could be. The other thing to watch will be player retention and what the roster looks like next year. Based on the senior night participation, comments by players and coaches, and the stark reality of the post-COVID-19 reprieve ending for the 85 scholarship limit, it seems like we're once again going to see a bloodbath in terms of losing players with eligibility remaining. I don't see how we expect to compete with this being the situation. The front seven is going to be anemic next year. We talk about senior leadership but will likely have just a handful of fifth year guys, a stark contrast to other teams. This season made us feel terrible about Stanford football and I desperately want to find reasons to feel optimistic but am having trouble identifying the theory of the case on why we should have hope. Lacking that, I hope we at least get an exciting off-season of new blood on the coaching staff and maniacal effort on the recruiting trail. Even with those we'll be one of the least relevant teams in Power Five football heading into 2022, but we need to see something.
2. Last night's game was the cherry on top for a shit sundae. At least players fought for the seniors. A 2.4 yard per play differential is horrible (significantly less competitive than even the Oregon State game, for instance) but it's far more competitive than what we saw against Utah and Cal. Surpassing the worst games in Stanford history shouldn't be the standard, but I'm glad the team didn't roll over. Sadly, this team fighting added up to one of the worst teams in the country this year. 3-9 tells a vivid story all its own but I don't think totally captures it. On the season, we didn't finish top 100 in any of these most major categories: scoring offense, scoring defense, total offense, total defense, yards per play, yards per play allowed, rushing offense, or rushing defense. We weren't top 80 in any of the major passing stats on offense. The passing defense (#82 in yards per attempt allowed and #76 in passer rating allowed) was the team's biggest strength this year. That's the kind of ineptitude you really need to re-read and dwell on to let sink in just how bad that is to have your team's strengths still be well below-average. We sucked comprehensively in 2021.
3. Stanford's defense gave up 7.2 yards per play to the Domers, the fourth worst of our season and the third best of Notre Dame's season. Over the course of the season this would be the #126 defense in the nation. On offense, Stanford mustered 4.8 yards per play. Here's an amazingly pathetic stat: this is the best the offense has done in the last five games. Over the course of the season an offense at the level of productivity of last night's Stanford offense would be #118 in the nation, yet that was the best we've been on a yards per play basis in over a month. As Brock Huard said on the telecast, the Stanford offense is broken. By the way, the clarity and reality-based announcing was a breath of fresh air. The media need to stop pretending the emperor has any clothes.
4. While the fight was futile, one thing last night jumped out as a silver lining: the defense's 4.8 yards per carry allowed is the stingiest anybody has been against Notre Dame in the last five games and almost a yard better than our season average. That's the second time in three weeks post-scheme change in which the run defense has been solid against a tough opponent, though Notre Dame's run game is nowhere near as imposing as Oregon State's. Alas, we coupled this performance with a pass defense performance that allowed a 167.33 passer rating and 9.5 yards per attempt. This was Notre Dame's third best yards per attempt game, second best passing yardage game, and sixth best passer rating game and was bottom three for Stanford in each respect. This continues the theme of our breakdown in pass defense in November after it having been a relative strength of the team all year. It also continues a theme that's bedeviled us for years: the defense is so weak that when we identify a weakness and coach/scheme/make a point of emphasis to correct it, that often appears to have the effect of playing whack-a-mole. We seem incapable of being simultaneously effective in both aspects of defense.
5. The relative silver lining on offense was the passing game. The passing stats were middle-of-the-road by Stanford 2021 standards, which is a pretty good showing considering the strength of Notre Dame's defense (#25 in yards per attempt allowed, #17 in passer rating allowed, #7 in sacks). The enemy gets a vote and Notre Dame is a formidable enemy for a passing offense to face. We battled. Were it not for Wilson's extremely brutal game we likely would have given Notre Dame's pass defense one of its stiffer tests. In contrast, the run game went out with a whimper. 2.5 yards per carry is sub-par even by our standards and the second stingiest Notre Dame has been this year.
6. While we know McKee can sling it, handling the pocket remains a massive issue for him, demonstrated this time by the the sack/fumble, which was on him. In terms of the passing efficiency, McKee's stats benefited tremendously by individual greatness by Yurosek (the long touchdown, the one-handed grab, etc.) and were harmed tremendously by Wilson's no good, horrible, very bad day. Given that it's a bit hard for me to disentangle variables and assess McKee's day. Total QBR thought he was horrible (119th of 121 QBs nationally). PFF thought he was good (76.2 grade, second best of any starter on either side of the ball). Hard to make sense of that discrepancy. Regardless, McKee's season had a very poor trajectory that leaves him an enigma heading into 2022. Overall he was good for a freshman (51 of 127 QBs nationally in Total QBR, seventh in the Pac-12 in essentially a tie with Chase Garbers for 7th/8th) but it was a tale of two seasons. After a beginning of his year that evoked Andrew Luck comparisons, he had one good game in his last five and had a miserable 4 touchdown to 7 interception ratio in that span. In the final analysis his freshman year appears worse than those of Luck, Kevin Hogan, and KJ Costello, and of course McKee played at a much older stage of physical and emotional development. I'm less confident in what we have in McKee than I was a month ago. It's hard to escape that he's essentially our only hope for relevance for the foreseeable future (a very slim hope given the state of the program around him) so hopefully next season is Good McKee from start to finish.
7. On offense, aside from the obvious (Yurosek), it's hard to identify good performances in a game like this, sadly a theme for us in recent weeks. I can't call Jones' game "good" but it reminded me of games in the Teevens' years where we had to find silver linings for 35 yard rushing performances. In this case Jones did get us three first downs and fought with heart for that touchdown. As the announcers said, his 2021 was a nightmare and it's sad to think about the level of success he had in 2020 compared to 2021. I hope next year is much more enjoyable for him. By the way, I was heartsick that Sanders got his passing touchdown moment of glory taken away by the bogus call on Jones.
8. The defense had some guys battle. Reid capped off a great final (it seems 😢) campaign by fighting through the whistle. He had three first down run stops and a half tackle for loss. It's a shame that the offsides on 4th and 4 when he timed the delay of game, extending the drive into a final touchdown drive, will potentially be the last memory of his football career. He had a really good last year. Judging from Shaw's post-game remarks it seems like it's the end of the line at Stanford. That's going to leave big shoes to fill. As Shaw said post-game, we really missed McGill this season. That's our playmaker. The interception was the kind of play you don't really see Stanford players making much of the last half decade. It's not an accident he had interceptions in each of his games back. He has a knack for the ball. While he had bad moments yesterday, he also gave us a stop on a short passing play, a third quarter tackle of Mayer that helped force a punt, and a tackle for loss.
9. Sanborn continued his streak of good punting once the season was lost and the games were uncompetitive. In this one he had net punts of 45, 49 (inside the 15), 41 (would have been 53 but had to re-punt because of a penalty), 44, 48 (pinning Notre Dame at the 3), 42 (inside the 20), 52 (inside the 20), and 51. Incredible game. One of the best punting games you'll ever see. This monster game to cap off a good end of the season for him puts us at #78 in net punting on the year. Obviously that's crappy, especially by our standards, but we weren't top 100 essentially all year. Elsewhere on the special teams front, the frequency of penalties on special teams is a black mark on Alamar's resume.
10. Game balls: Yurosek, McGill, Sanborn, Turner
11. Attention now turns to what changes will be made this off-season to stabilize this sinking ship. They need to be very significant. It remains to be seen how significant they will be. Personally I think we will see coaching staff changes and scheme changes. But there is a wide range in how significant it could be. The other thing to watch will be player retention and what the roster looks like next year. Based on the senior night participation, comments by players and coaches, and the stark reality of the post-COVID-19 reprieve ending for the 85 scholarship limit, it seems like we're once again going to see a bloodbath in terms of losing players with eligibility remaining. I don't see how we expect to compete with this being the situation. The front seven is going to be anemic next year. We talk about senior leadership but will likely have just a handful of fifth year guys, a stark contrast to other teams. This season made us feel terrible about Stanford football and I desperately want to find reasons to feel optimistic but am having trouble identifying the theory of the case on why we should have hope. Lacking that, I hope we at least get an exciting off-season of new blood on the coaching staff and maniacal effort on the recruiting trail. Even with those we'll be one of the least relevant teams in Power Five football heading into 2022, but we need to see something.
