1. It's impossible not to view a loss to an FCS team as a low point. This shouldn't happen to Power Five teams. We now join Northwestern, Kansas, Washington State, Iowa State (four times this century and six overall!), Virginia, Oregon State, Colorado, Duke, Minnesota, and Rutgers as the only Power Five schools to have multiple losses to FCS schools this century. That's a bad list to be on. On the other hand, there was a real we are who we thought we were vibe to last night that makes it less painful. This isn't like 2005 to UC Davis when it was a massive shock and ultimately kept us from breaking a multi-year bowl-less streak. This is a close loss to a team computers thought would be a tossup and will ultimately deprive us of a winnable game in a year that will end up with one, two, or three wins. It does not register very high either on the surprise meter or the stakes meter. That we can lose to an FCS team without it being shocking or too damaging is yet another sign of how low we've fallen. It's so low that I'm starting to have more doubts Taylor is capable of digging out of it, but we can't give up yet. Our theory of the case was always that we hired a culture builder who could engineer a steady (and quite possibly slow) rebuild and we just saw the culture he developed the last four years out-play the one he inherited. It doesn't fundamentally change the diagnosis of our challenge or the hope for what Taylor can bring. It was another miserable night of football, though, and it's an open question how many years of those will be too much for the program to recover.
2. There were a lot of plays that could have gone differently and swung the outcome - the two interceptions, Wright's knee being called down on the pick six and that play not being challenged (or if it was officially reviewed being an awfully quick review), the broken play game winner from Bennett to Fulcher, the bogus roughing the passer penalty on Bernadel - but to be honest Sacramento State persevered through just as many plays one could say that about. Fundamentally this felt like evenly matched teams where the difference was sacks. Six to zero in that category is hard to overcome. In particular, Jett Stanley was the difference and he ate our interior line alive (by the way, recall that the day we hired Taylor I highlighted Stanley as the only Sacramento State player I viewed as an attractive and realistic transfer target for us....oh well). The story of this game was our inability to prevent negative plays in pass protection or to generate negative plays for the Hornets via our pass rush. This is super depressing to me. Strength up front should always be the differentiator between FBS and FCS and there was no reason heading in to think Sacramento State was particularly strong in the trenches. PFF has us #131 (of 133) in pass blocking and #93 in pass rush (such a bitter disappointment given the hype for the OLBs and the April scheme). It's hard to see how we give ourselves much of a shot at all against Pac-12 teams with that being the case.
3. There was more to like on offense than on defense in this one. Sac State had played two FCS bottom feeders (winless Nicholls State and winless Texas A&M-Commerce) and ended up getting more yards per play against us than they came in averaging or than Taylor's Sacramento State teams ever averaged in a season. What.The.Hell. The Bobby April defense is a gigantic disappointment so far. PFF has the offense #99 and defense #120. On offense we are #77 in yards per play and #97 in scoring offense and on defense we're #126 in yards per play allowed and #123 in scoring defense. I would not be surprised if advanced metrics like FEI and SP+ start to reflect this as well. The defense is an abject disaster so far. Last night the defense forced one punt. The pass defense did worse than #215 Texas A&M-Commerce. The run defense gave up almost a yard more per carry than #183 Nicholls State. Kaiden Bennett is an elite FCS player but we shouldn't be making him look like Caleb Williams. The defense has a lot of explaining to do.
4. The offense wasn't good enough either but it was a lot better than the defense. Sacramento State has a vaunted FCS defense (more so than the offense this year in all likelihood) and we ended up getting 5.9 yards per play, over a yard per play better than they've allowed on average against their lowly first two opponents. It was the best our offense has done yet this season on a yards per play basis and Sac State has a better defense than Hawaii (and is probably closer to USC's defensive quality than many realize). There were things to build off on offense as well as a lot of meat left on the bone. In the run game, our 4.3 yards per carry (even accounting for all the sacks) was the most Sac State has given up, but edging out Texas A&M-Commerce is not cause for celebration and it's the lowest yards per carry we've seen. It's nice that we've been able to run a bit in each game but it's sobering to realize we haven't faced a good major college football run defense yet (USC is #94 in yards per carry allowed). In the pass game, we did well by the standards of the lowly passing games the Hornets have played and had by far our most explosive game yet this season. On the year we have five 30+ yard passing plays and three came last night against a Sac State coverage that has been a defining strength this season and last. Encouraging to see some chunk plays that aren't just relying on Yurosek to bail us out. However, silver linings can't overshadow the dark clouds of the two horrible, game-costing interceptions, nor the inefficacy when not connecting on chunk plays.
5. Along with that inefficacy continues the QB controversy. I fully supported pulling Daniels for Lamson as I think Daniels has consistently looked bad (and especially not comfortable and not good at processing) in his limited action the last two weeks, and the red zone interception was inexcusable. [By the way, we gave Shaw a lot of grief for the predictability of red zone playcalling but to a significant degree it worked, at least a lot better than Shawfense did on the rest of the field. In the years Pritchard had the coordinator title, we were #59, #119, #6, #25, and #35 in red zone touchdown conversion percentage. So far this year we are #116. Something to keep an eye on.] Daniels is not playing well and seeing how Lamson would do against a non-USC opponent made sense to me. Unfortunately, Lamson did terribly too. In Total QBR Lamson was #122 of 124 QBs this week. He was a negative in every single component of Total QBR other than running. Putting this into historical perspective, Lamson's 6.2 Total QBR slots in as the third worst ever recorded by a Stanford QB, a bit better than 2019 Jack West vs. UCLA and 2018 KJ Costello vs. Pitt and a bit worse than 2017 Keller Chryst vs. San Diego State, 2008 Tavita Pritchard vs. TCU, and 2006 TC Ostrander vs. Arizona. Like Daniels, Lamson had a horrible interception. I hope the picks can be teachable moments for both. For Daniels, it looked like we were on our way to a comfortable victory and that mistake turned the tide....hopefully an object lesson that you can't let up on concentration and decision-making even when up multiple scores. For Lamson, hopefully he learns that you can't let desperation to get out of a bad play make the play worse, or let yourself lose composure (recall it happened immediately after he air mailed Farrell on what should have been a touchdown or at least big gain). I will be very interested in Borghi's analysis of QB play. I am inclined to think sacks are a QB stat and Lamson taking five sacks is a black mark, but it was also evident the OL struggled mightily in the second half. I wonder if astute observers can pick up on something worth saving or further exploring in these guys. The QB play through three weeks has been poor enough (among 133 qualifying QBs nationally, Daniels is #90 on the season in Total QBR and Lamson is dead last #133) that I actually want to see Patu. We need to see what Patu looks like against live bullets. If none of these guys turns a corner in the next 4-5 weeks, what we may be on track for is a Jackson try out later in the year after the true freshman gets more settled.
2. There were a lot of plays that could have gone differently and swung the outcome - the two interceptions, Wright's knee being called down on the pick six and that play not being challenged (or if it was officially reviewed being an awfully quick review), the broken play game winner from Bennett to Fulcher, the bogus roughing the passer penalty on Bernadel - but to be honest Sacramento State persevered through just as many plays one could say that about. Fundamentally this felt like evenly matched teams where the difference was sacks. Six to zero in that category is hard to overcome. In particular, Jett Stanley was the difference and he ate our interior line alive (by the way, recall that the day we hired Taylor I highlighted Stanley as the only Sacramento State player I viewed as an attractive and realistic transfer target for us....oh well). The story of this game was our inability to prevent negative plays in pass protection or to generate negative plays for the Hornets via our pass rush. This is super depressing to me. Strength up front should always be the differentiator between FBS and FCS and there was no reason heading in to think Sacramento State was particularly strong in the trenches. PFF has us #131 (of 133) in pass blocking and #93 in pass rush (such a bitter disappointment given the hype for the OLBs and the April scheme). It's hard to see how we give ourselves much of a shot at all against Pac-12 teams with that being the case.
3. There was more to like on offense than on defense in this one. Sac State had played two FCS bottom feeders (winless Nicholls State and winless Texas A&M-Commerce) and ended up getting more yards per play against us than they came in averaging or than Taylor's Sacramento State teams ever averaged in a season. What.The.Hell. The Bobby April defense is a gigantic disappointment so far. PFF has the offense #99 and defense #120. On offense we are #77 in yards per play and #97 in scoring offense and on defense we're #126 in yards per play allowed and #123 in scoring defense. I would not be surprised if advanced metrics like FEI and SP+ start to reflect this as well. The defense is an abject disaster so far. Last night the defense forced one punt. The pass defense did worse than #215 Texas A&M-Commerce. The run defense gave up almost a yard more per carry than #183 Nicholls State. Kaiden Bennett is an elite FCS player but we shouldn't be making him look like Caleb Williams. The defense has a lot of explaining to do.
4. The offense wasn't good enough either but it was a lot better than the defense. Sacramento State has a vaunted FCS defense (more so than the offense this year in all likelihood) and we ended up getting 5.9 yards per play, over a yard per play better than they've allowed on average against their lowly first two opponents. It was the best our offense has done yet this season on a yards per play basis and Sac State has a better defense than Hawaii (and is probably closer to USC's defensive quality than many realize). There were things to build off on offense as well as a lot of meat left on the bone. In the run game, our 4.3 yards per carry (even accounting for all the sacks) was the most Sac State has given up, but edging out Texas A&M-Commerce is not cause for celebration and it's the lowest yards per carry we've seen. It's nice that we've been able to run a bit in each game but it's sobering to realize we haven't faced a good major college football run defense yet (USC is #94 in yards per carry allowed). In the pass game, we did well by the standards of the lowly passing games the Hornets have played and had by far our most explosive game yet this season. On the year we have five 30+ yard passing plays and three came last night against a Sac State coverage that has been a defining strength this season and last. Encouraging to see some chunk plays that aren't just relying on Yurosek to bail us out. However, silver linings can't overshadow the dark clouds of the two horrible, game-costing interceptions, nor the inefficacy when not connecting on chunk plays.
5. Along with that inefficacy continues the QB controversy. I fully supported pulling Daniels for Lamson as I think Daniels has consistently looked bad (and especially not comfortable and not good at processing) in his limited action the last two weeks, and the red zone interception was inexcusable. [By the way, we gave Shaw a lot of grief for the predictability of red zone playcalling but to a significant degree it worked, at least a lot better than Shawfense did on the rest of the field. In the years Pritchard had the coordinator title, we were #59, #119, #6, #25, and #35 in red zone touchdown conversion percentage. So far this year we are #116. Something to keep an eye on.] Daniels is not playing well and seeing how Lamson would do against a non-USC opponent made sense to me. Unfortunately, Lamson did terribly too. In Total QBR Lamson was #122 of 124 QBs this week. He was a negative in every single component of Total QBR other than running. Putting this into historical perspective, Lamson's 6.2 Total QBR slots in as the third worst ever recorded by a Stanford QB, a bit better than 2019 Jack West vs. UCLA and 2018 KJ Costello vs. Pitt and a bit worse than 2017 Keller Chryst vs. San Diego State, 2008 Tavita Pritchard vs. TCU, and 2006 TC Ostrander vs. Arizona. Like Daniels, Lamson had a horrible interception. I hope the picks can be teachable moments for both. For Daniels, it looked like we were on our way to a comfortable victory and that mistake turned the tide....hopefully an object lesson that you can't let up on concentration and decision-making even when up multiple scores. For Lamson, hopefully he learns that you can't let desperation to get out of a bad play make the play worse, or let yourself lose composure (recall it happened immediately after he air mailed Farrell on what should have been a touchdown or at least big gain). I will be very interested in Borghi's analysis of QB play. I am inclined to think sacks are a QB stat and Lamson taking five sacks is a black mark, but it was also evident the OL struggled mightily in the second half. I wonder if astute observers can pick up on something worth saving or further exploring in these guys. The QB play through three weeks has been poor enough (among 133 qualifying QBs nationally, Daniels is #90 on the season in Total QBR and Lamson is dead last #133) that I actually want to see Patu. We need to see what Patu looks like against live bullets. If none of these guys turns a corner in the next 4-5 weeks, what we may be on track for is a Jackson try out later in the year after the true freshman gets more settled.
Last edited:
