1. A good road win against a Power Five team that corroborated our sense of our strengths and weaknesses. Nice to get a win in our first game against an SEC opponent in 43 years, though Vanderbilt is a weak team. Also nice to put a bow on the Road Dog stretch of seven straight games away from home. Technically we went 6-0 on the road as Kansas State was neutral site. With that stretch being so much of the team's identity it will be interesting to see how they play in home environs. Based on what we've seen so far we could be favored in every game left aside from Oregon but there are no gimmes remaining. Buckle up. There's still wide variance in how well this season could go but I feel better about the team than I did heading into the opener.
2. This was the second straight good, balanced road win against a Power Five team, and also the second straight game we did not keep our boots on their neck and finish like Shaw would want. The offense's 7.5 yards per play is the most in a win since 2018, although that had a lot to do with the opponent. The enemy gets a vote and Vanderbilt's is usually to roll over. They got torched like this more often than not last year. The defense's 4.7 yards per play allowed is the fewest we've allowed in the last 19 games but what I previously characterized as soft run defense looks like it may be worse than that. Nonetheless, putting quality of opponent aside, you have to go back to the 2017 opener in Australia against Rice for a game when Stanford dominated both sides of the ball more than this on a per play basis.
3. This game reinforced my sense of the team's strengths (the passing game on both sides of the ball) and glaring weakness (run defense) and left open the question mark on whether we can be bullies on either side of the trenches (though it's looking like no on defense). McKee came down to earth but was still #16 of 99 QBs nationally in Total QBR this week and is now in a virtual dead heat for #2/#3 nationally on the season. If this was a reversion to the mean for him it's still a very high level of play that will make Stanford a tough offense to stop all season. On the other side of the ball, the pass defense gave up an 88.21 passer rating, the most Vanderbilt's passing game has been stifled in ten games going back to last year's LSU game. The 3.8 yards per attempt allowed is Vanderbilt's lowest since 2019. Astounding to me to see a Stanford pass defense be tougher than SEC defenses. This continues to be the shock of the year for me and I'm still expecting some regression to come, but it makes us so much more competitive to not have a Swiss cheese pass defense.
4. At first blush, the Stanford run game (200+ yards, 7.6 yards per rush, incredible balance across four backs) looked like another positive. Alas, I gotta say "not so fast, my friends." Vanderbilt very well may have the worst run defense in America. They gave up 4.8 yards per carry to FCS East Tennessee State and 6.3 yards per carry to FBS cellar dweller Colorado State. It was good for the confidence of our running backs that all four had great success, but I don't think it tells us anything about how our run game will fare against competent run defenses. I liked that each back had a very nifty run, which shows they can do things when given holes. My problem is I don't yet know if the line can open up holes against real defenses. On the other side of the ball, the case is unfortunately much more clear cut: I was too polite in calling the run defense soft. 5.6 yards per rush allowed is almost three yards worse than either ETSU or CSU allowed against Vandy. Gross. After all the off-season talk, our run defense is heinous.
5. One of the biggest and most interesting challenges facing our coaches is how to manage workloads in the running back room. A few games into the season, it seems the coaches were not blowing smoke in talking up the RB depth. All four guys can do damage with holes. The big surprise is that Smith has emerged as RB2. I am sure the coaches would dispute that and talk up Peat's role but snap counts don't lie. We play Peat 8-9 snaps a game and Smith 15 snaps a game. The difference is Smith's receiving versatility, which allows him to be on the field the same time as Jones at times. But even in straight-up backfield snaps the two are getting similar run. Smith is giving us great versatility and pretty good effectiveness so I'm not complaining, but eight snaps per game feels like too little for Peat. He's this team's big play weapon, bar none. I agree with those who argue that this is less a matter of robbing from Jones or Smith to pay Peat and more a matter of picking up the pace so we have more snaps to go around. In this game Vanderbilt had 27 more offensive plays than us, which follows USC having 21 more offensive plays. I think Shaw would offer a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" response and it's true enough that we just had back-to-back dominant 40+ point games. Nonetheless, my view is the same as it's been almost continuously under Shaw: we have better players on offense than almost every team we face has players on defense so I'd like to see us put the pressure on defenses. I don't reject the efficiency arguments out of hand, especially when they're working as has been the case the last two weeks, but on balance I still think we should play faster.
6. We had several players who were in need of getting right against an over-matched opponent and it was great to see so many take advantage of the opportunity. Rouse, Jones, Fox, Williamson, and Herron all had good games. Hinton wasn't as good but it was a huge step forward for him and, in particular, something to build on in pass protection, which has been a glaring weakness. We shouldn't overreact to any one game, good or bad, but it's good to see these guys give themselves a chance of developing momentum, especially guys we'll need for years to come like Herron and Hinton.
7. In the off-season I did an analysis showing that we need 5-7 high-quality starter-level defenders to get to a mediocre defense or better. Through three games PFF grades give us five: Wyrick, Reid, Mangum-Farrar, Kelly, and Damuni. Booker was at that level last year but not so far this year. This defense has a chance to be mediocre, which, coupled with a very good offense, would be a quite competitive team. The revelation has been Wyrick. I love that dude. He's somehow a McGill-like playmaker but with fewer mistakes, and as a true freshman in his first month of college football. I think we have a star. If he loses snaps to Bonner I am going to scream. Kelly is the star power, now #5 in the nation in passes defended. Reid is the steady guy, and the only guy who gives offenses anything to think about in pass rush. Mangum-Farrar wasn't as good in his second start as the first so let's see more data points there. Damuni is Damuni, just a good but not great guy in the middle. I cherish that after our ILB experience in recent years. The question for our defense is whether any others can join these guys. As you can see, none of the guys who are grading well are defensive linemen. Booker stepping up is the ingredient the team is most missing right now.
8. Special teams is often a significant comparative advantage for Stanford and it looks like that might be the case this year as well. Most encouraging in this game was the coming out parties for Karty and Filkins. Karty was seven for seven on touch backs on kickoffs and made both field goals, including a 46 yarder. Filkins is #5 in the nation in punt return average. More proven than these two is the asset Peat is in the return game, now #10 in the nation after being #27 last year. Sanborn was an asset in field position and, notably, took care of business in pinning Vandy when he had the chance and, after that got taken away due to penalty, pinned them even further back. The one eyebrow I had raised was that we've had several punt block/coverage plays in which we skirted the line on running into/roughing the kicker, including one in this game that Vandy got called for a penalty instead. If this risk/reward leads to a few blocked punts that might be worth it but at the same token I certainly don't want to ever give an opponent a fresh set of downs when they had been forced to punt.
9. Game balls: McKee (wanted to give it to Jones or cop out and give it to the entire RB room, but I don't do group game balls and looking through the play-by-play it's just too clear McKee was the reason we were able to move the chains on the scoring drives after the first RB-driven drive), Wyrick, Filkins (apologies to Karty), Gould
10. The UCLA game won't have any national attention now that it's likely to be two unranked 2-1 Pac-12 teams, but it's big for us. First time playing on campus in nearly a year. First time playing in front of our fans in 665 days (!!!!!). Winner takes the early lead in the Pac-12 conference race. Decent chance a win makes Stanford ranked for the first time in 756 days. For reasons we can get into later this shapes up to be a very interesting, competitive game. Momentum and health-wise I don't think we could have asked for a better first three games to head into this one, though the more wins we rack up the more of a missed opportunity the opening dud against Kansas State looks like. To me whether we beat UCLA game feels like the difference between a team fighting for a bowl appearance and a team fighting for national relevance. Beat the Bruins!
2. This was the second straight good, balanced road win against a Power Five team, and also the second straight game we did not keep our boots on their neck and finish like Shaw would want. The offense's 7.5 yards per play is the most in a win since 2018, although that had a lot to do with the opponent. The enemy gets a vote and Vanderbilt's is usually to roll over. They got torched like this more often than not last year. The defense's 4.7 yards per play allowed is the fewest we've allowed in the last 19 games but what I previously characterized as soft run defense looks like it may be worse than that. Nonetheless, putting quality of opponent aside, you have to go back to the 2017 opener in Australia against Rice for a game when Stanford dominated both sides of the ball more than this on a per play basis.
3. This game reinforced my sense of the team's strengths (the passing game on both sides of the ball) and glaring weakness (run defense) and left open the question mark on whether we can be bullies on either side of the trenches (though it's looking like no on defense). McKee came down to earth but was still #16 of 99 QBs nationally in Total QBR this week and is now in a virtual dead heat for #2/#3 nationally on the season. If this was a reversion to the mean for him it's still a very high level of play that will make Stanford a tough offense to stop all season. On the other side of the ball, the pass defense gave up an 88.21 passer rating, the most Vanderbilt's passing game has been stifled in ten games going back to last year's LSU game. The 3.8 yards per attempt allowed is Vanderbilt's lowest since 2019. Astounding to me to see a Stanford pass defense be tougher than SEC defenses. This continues to be the shock of the year for me and I'm still expecting some regression to come, but it makes us so much more competitive to not have a Swiss cheese pass defense.
4. At first blush, the Stanford run game (200+ yards, 7.6 yards per rush, incredible balance across four backs) looked like another positive. Alas, I gotta say "not so fast, my friends." Vanderbilt very well may have the worst run defense in America. They gave up 4.8 yards per carry to FCS East Tennessee State and 6.3 yards per carry to FBS cellar dweller Colorado State. It was good for the confidence of our running backs that all four had great success, but I don't think it tells us anything about how our run game will fare against competent run defenses. I liked that each back had a very nifty run, which shows they can do things when given holes. My problem is I don't yet know if the line can open up holes against real defenses. On the other side of the ball, the case is unfortunately much more clear cut: I was too polite in calling the run defense soft. 5.6 yards per rush allowed is almost three yards worse than either ETSU or CSU allowed against Vandy. Gross. After all the off-season talk, our run defense is heinous.
5. One of the biggest and most interesting challenges facing our coaches is how to manage workloads in the running back room. A few games into the season, it seems the coaches were not blowing smoke in talking up the RB depth. All four guys can do damage with holes. The big surprise is that Smith has emerged as RB2. I am sure the coaches would dispute that and talk up Peat's role but snap counts don't lie. We play Peat 8-9 snaps a game and Smith 15 snaps a game. The difference is Smith's receiving versatility, which allows him to be on the field the same time as Jones at times. But even in straight-up backfield snaps the two are getting similar run. Smith is giving us great versatility and pretty good effectiveness so I'm not complaining, but eight snaps per game feels like too little for Peat. He's this team's big play weapon, bar none. I agree with those who argue that this is less a matter of robbing from Jones or Smith to pay Peat and more a matter of picking up the pace so we have more snaps to go around. In this game Vanderbilt had 27 more offensive plays than us, which follows USC having 21 more offensive plays. I think Shaw would offer a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" response and it's true enough that we just had back-to-back dominant 40+ point games. Nonetheless, my view is the same as it's been almost continuously under Shaw: we have better players on offense than almost every team we face has players on defense so I'd like to see us put the pressure on defenses. I don't reject the efficiency arguments out of hand, especially when they're working as has been the case the last two weeks, but on balance I still think we should play faster.
6. We had several players who were in need of getting right against an over-matched opponent and it was great to see so many take advantage of the opportunity. Rouse, Jones, Fox, Williamson, and Herron all had good games. Hinton wasn't as good but it was a huge step forward for him and, in particular, something to build on in pass protection, which has been a glaring weakness. We shouldn't overreact to any one game, good or bad, but it's good to see these guys give themselves a chance of developing momentum, especially guys we'll need for years to come like Herron and Hinton.
7. In the off-season I did an analysis showing that we need 5-7 high-quality starter-level defenders to get to a mediocre defense or better. Through three games PFF grades give us five: Wyrick, Reid, Mangum-Farrar, Kelly, and Damuni. Booker was at that level last year but not so far this year. This defense has a chance to be mediocre, which, coupled with a very good offense, would be a quite competitive team. The revelation has been Wyrick. I love that dude. He's somehow a McGill-like playmaker but with fewer mistakes, and as a true freshman in his first month of college football. I think we have a star. If he loses snaps to Bonner I am going to scream. Kelly is the star power, now #5 in the nation in passes defended. Reid is the steady guy, and the only guy who gives offenses anything to think about in pass rush. Mangum-Farrar wasn't as good in his second start as the first so let's see more data points there. Damuni is Damuni, just a good but not great guy in the middle. I cherish that after our ILB experience in recent years. The question for our defense is whether any others can join these guys. As you can see, none of the guys who are grading well are defensive linemen. Booker stepping up is the ingredient the team is most missing right now.
8. Special teams is often a significant comparative advantage for Stanford and it looks like that might be the case this year as well. Most encouraging in this game was the coming out parties for Karty and Filkins. Karty was seven for seven on touch backs on kickoffs and made both field goals, including a 46 yarder. Filkins is #5 in the nation in punt return average. More proven than these two is the asset Peat is in the return game, now #10 in the nation after being #27 last year. Sanborn was an asset in field position and, notably, took care of business in pinning Vandy when he had the chance and, after that got taken away due to penalty, pinned them even further back. The one eyebrow I had raised was that we've had several punt block/coverage plays in which we skirted the line on running into/roughing the kicker, including one in this game that Vandy got called for a penalty instead. If this risk/reward leads to a few blocked punts that might be worth it but at the same token I certainly don't want to ever give an opponent a fresh set of downs when they had been forced to punt.
9. Game balls: McKee (wanted to give it to Jones or cop out and give it to the entire RB room, but I don't do group game balls and looking through the play-by-play it's just too clear McKee was the reason we were able to move the chains on the scoring drives after the first RB-driven drive), Wyrick, Filkins (apologies to Karty), Gould
10. The UCLA game won't have any national attention now that it's likely to be two unranked 2-1 Pac-12 teams, but it's big for us. First time playing on campus in nearly a year. First time playing in front of our fans in 665 days (!!!!!). Winner takes the early lead in the Pac-12 conference race. Decent chance a win makes Stanford ranked for the first time in 756 days. For reasons we can get into later this shapes up to be a very interesting, competitive game. Momentum and health-wise I don't think we could have asked for a better first three games to head into this one, though the more wins we rack up the more of a missed opportunity the opening dud against Kansas State looks like. To me whether we beat UCLA game feels like the difference between a team fighting for a bowl appearance and a team fighting for national relevance. Beat the Bruins!
Last edited:
