1. Halloween Eve was indeed frightful. That was two lame teams playing like the below-average Power Five teams they are. It was deeply ugly before bringing the kind of fourth quarter drama that sometimes happens when two drunks flail at each other all night to the point they're finally landing some blows at closing time. It's deeply fitting that Stanford experienced deja vu with the Washington State game, as both examples are exactly who we are: a tough, disciplined, resilient team able to weather adversity and scrape for a late lead and a seemingly crucial defensive stop only to squander it with on-brand decision-making that fails to understand possession matters more than time, an epic special teams fail, and clock management that puts us at a disadvantage. These last two results are especially fitting as they balance out the karmic scales a bit with 2020 when this was also the team we were but the end-of-game sequences happened to bounce our way. 3-5 may (slightly) understate our quality but 4-2 overstated it.
2. Computer algorithms like Sagarin help us cut through the obfuscating effect of luck, variance, and schedule to give something approaching an objective picture. That picture isn't pretty. Stanford 2021 is Sagarin #64. The most comparable Stanford teams of the last quarter century were 2002, 2003, 2007, 2019, and 2020. In other words, we've been consistently the same poor level for three years in a row, and it's the level Teevens mustered in his first two seasons even without inheriting an offensive line from Willingham.....and considerably worse than the level we were when Teevens got fired. The harsh reality is that if Shaw wasn't who he is with all the goodwill built up from being our winningest coach, these last three seasons would get him fired.
3. The offense was a bigger problem than the defense yesterday but it's a much closer call than Shaw thinks. Washington's offense stinks. Even after playing us they are 104th in the nation in scoring. Only Arkansas State has allowed more yards per play than what we allowed. That's horrible. The offense was even worse. We gave up about a half yard per play worse than the Washington averaged allowed and did even worse than Cal and Arizona (the #124 offense in the nation!). And we did it against a Husky defense lacking Ulofoshio, Bowman, Cook, and Turner and that gifted us two first downs off penalties. It was a comprehensively bad performance - career worst performance by our QB, 2.4 yards per carry being right on the level Arkansas State managed and worse than anybody else the last two seasons, the most yards per carry (5.5) any defense has allowed against Washington in the last 20 games, the field position nightmare our punting has become - with one exception. As has been typical this season, the pass defense was a bright spot. The 5.8 yards per pass allowed was the third best of Washington's eight opponents and the 130.26 passer rating allowed was right around Washington's average. Pass defense is the least of our problems. Unfortunately, we have a lot of other problems.
4. I'm surprised to say it but for once the problems on offense started with QB play. McKee finally had a bad game, #82 of 109 performances nationally in Total QBR. The enemy always gets a vote and Washington's spectacular corners played a significant role in the struggles but that's not the whole story. McKee actually didn't throw badly compared to typical QBs, as his yards per attempt and passer rating were both the third best of any Husky opponent this year. But the ability to throw a good ball most of the time is not his problem. The problem is twofold (both related). First, it's the turnovers. Three QB turnovers in a game is tough to overcome. Second, his pocket awareness continues to be a huge problem. He is now 103rd of 130 qualifying QBs nationally in expected points added from sacks. He's great throwing the ball and awful in the pocket. Getting anywhere close to his ceiling will require giant strides in pocket presence. Can this be learned/taught? Will it happen before he goes to the NFL?
5. It was a putrid offensive performance despite it being the rare game we didn't get beat in the trenches up front, at least not flat out. The run blocking was enough for Jones to have a good second half, which is rare for us to have any run game success outside of the first quarter of games. PFF viewed Hornibrook taking Hinton's snaps away as a significant upgrade compared to Hinton's performance to date. For the second straight week Nugent had a career game, and Bragg also graded well. McKee had a vote on the sacks. All in all, PFF graded it our best run blocking and third best pass blocking game of the season. In fact, the last two games have been far and away the best performances of the season for the line. The line may be rounding into form. And yet......13 points. I would say this is a clarifying moment except the insight has been pretty clear for years: what makes our offense "uneven" and "inconsistent" is less the players than the coaches. It's Shawfense, Coach Shaw.
6. On defense, I'm a broken record but I think I'm right: we badly lack dudes and playmaking. In this game we had zero sacks, zero turnovers, and only two tackles for loss. Kelly was all over the place with big plays (the forced fumble and two passes defended, including the fourth and 5 stop to get us the ball back for the ill-fated moribund turtle series) but who else is there? NOBODY. Booker is such a colossal disappointment. Forget the hype, on the season he's grading worse than Thomas Schaffer, Jovan Swann, and even Dylan Jackson. Let that sink in. But Herron, Miezan, and Mangum-Farrar were also guys we had big hopes for and aren't showing it. All these disappointments add up to a dire dearth of big plays. On the year, if you look at sacks, tackles for loss, interceptions, and fumbles recovered, the best we are in any of them is 97th. We are dead last in America in fumbles recovered. Speaking of which, yes, Wyrick not falling on the ball after Kelly's great hit on Otton was highly costly.
7. This game was a good example of why I'm so wistful for the lack of these big plays. We actually had a lot of defensive players play well. Kelly did his part and, while he got beat twice, that happened on a drive he salvaged to produce a turnover on downs. Damuni played as well as you can play without getting any big plays; I counted seven tackles that were solid down and distance successes. Reid harassed the QB several times, had a good run stop to start the second half, and had the 4th and 1 stuff in the 4th quarter. Williamson broke up a pass and was very good in all phases. Williams, Wyrick, Wade-Perry, Fox, and Toomer were solid. We didn't give up a touchdown until the last 21 seconds of the game. But we lost because we got crushed in the turnover margin.
8. It was a jarring moment in the post-game press conference when Shaw - in one of the darkest moods I've ever seen him - stopped his gloomy post mortem to "stop here" before answering a second question and talk about how special Yurosek is. Shaw realized he hadn't said anything positive and wasn't going to have occasion to so abruptly snapped himself out of the dirge to praise Yurosek, as was richly deserved. Yurosek is a monster. He is behind only Notre Dame's Michael Mayer as the top Power Five receiving tight end in the nation. We're not talking best TE in the conference anymore, we're already in best tight end in America conversation territory. Not that I expect to have more than 16 games left with Yurosek before he goes to the NFL, but technically he's a freshman in terms of eligibility. Monster.
9. Probably the most farcical thing about the program right now is that we have four scholarship specialists (other teams have 0-2) and are #116 in the nation in net punting. Sanborn is so godawful right now. He had the one great 50 yarder pinning Washington deep but that doesn't even begin to compensate for THREE punts of 32 yards or less, including the second week in a row in which he totally choked on the crucial punt (this time adding a delay of game on for good measure). If he has the yips there is no excuse for us to grin and bear it with another scholarship punter sitting on the bench.
10. Game balls: Yurosek, Kelly, Karty, Heffernan
11. Last night felt like a low point for the program but I think there's a fair shot we feel even lower next Friday night. How many people are going to show up for that? I haven't entirely given up on a bowl but it seems very unlikely. Even 5-7 would surprise me at this point. I hope to be shocked and to be one of the very few Stanford fans at some lowly bowl in December. However, if the next month goes more like how I expect, there's a silver lining that would probably be better for our future than pretending like 6-6 is an adequate result. I don't think anybody should tolerate the lowly state of the program right now. I expect coaching staff changes this off-season. Whether it's cosmetic or meaningful is another question and a 3-4 win season might increase the odds we get something meaningful. Even still, it's clear Shaw's mentality remains that we need to remove "errors" on both sides of the ball rather than that there's something fundamental in the team's design that holds us back. As long as that's the case I can't see the path back to relevance.
2. Computer algorithms like Sagarin help us cut through the obfuscating effect of luck, variance, and schedule to give something approaching an objective picture. That picture isn't pretty. Stanford 2021 is Sagarin #64. The most comparable Stanford teams of the last quarter century were 2002, 2003, 2007, 2019, and 2020. In other words, we've been consistently the same poor level for three years in a row, and it's the level Teevens mustered in his first two seasons even without inheriting an offensive line from Willingham.....and considerably worse than the level we were when Teevens got fired. The harsh reality is that if Shaw wasn't who he is with all the goodwill built up from being our winningest coach, these last three seasons would get him fired.
3. The offense was a bigger problem than the defense yesterday but it's a much closer call than Shaw thinks. Washington's offense stinks. Even after playing us they are 104th in the nation in scoring. Only Arkansas State has allowed more yards per play than what we allowed. That's horrible. The offense was even worse. We gave up about a half yard per play worse than the Washington averaged allowed and did even worse than Cal and Arizona (the #124 offense in the nation!). And we did it against a Husky defense lacking Ulofoshio, Bowman, Cook, and Turner and that gifted us two first downs off penalties. It was a comprehensively bad performance - career worst performance by our QB, 2.4 yards per carry being right on the level Arkansas State managed and worse than anybody else the last two seasons, the most yards per carry (5.5) any defense has allowed against Washington in the last 20 games, the field position nightmare our punting has become - with one exception. As has been typical this season, the pass defense was a bright spot. The 5.8 yards per pass allowed was the third best of Washington's eight opponents and the 130.26 passer rating allowed was right around Washington's average. Pass defense is the least of our problems. Unfortunately, we have a lot of other problems.
4. I'm surprised to say it but for once the problems on offense started with QB play. McKee finally had a bad game, #82 of 109 performances nationally in Total QBR. The enemy always gets a vote and Washington's spectacular corners played a significant role in the struggles but that's not the whole story. McKee actually didn't throw badly compared to typical QBs, as his yards per attempt and passer rating were both the third best of any Husky opponent this year. But the ability to throw a good ball most of the time is not his problem. The problem is twofold (both related). First, it's the turnovers. Three QB turnovers in a game is tough to overcome. Second, his pocket awareness continues to be a huge problem. He is now 103rd of 130 qualifying QBs nationally in expected points added from sacks. He's great throwing the ball and awful in the pocket. Getting anywhere close to his ceiling will require giant strides in pocket presence. Can this be learned/taught? Will it happen before he goes to the NFL?
5. It was a putrid offensive performance despite it being the rare game we didn't get beat in the trenches up front, at least not flat out. The run blocking was enough for Jones to have a good second half, which is rare for us to have any run game success outside of the first quarter of games. PFF viewed Hornibrook taking Hinton's snaps away as a significant upgrade compared to Hinton's performance to date. For the second straight week Nugent had a career game, and Bragg also graded well. McKee had a vote on the sacks. All in all, PFF graded it our best run blocking and third best pass blocking game of the season. In fact, the last two games have been far and away the best performances of the season for the line. The line may be rounding into form. And yet......13 points. I would say this is a clarifying moment except the insight has been pretty clear for years: what makes our offense "uneven" and "inconsistent" is less the players than the coaches. It's Shawfense, Coach Shaw.
6. On defense, I'm a broken record but I think I'm right: we badly lack dudes and playmaking. In this game we had zero sacks, zero turnovers, and only two tackles for loss. Kelly was all over the place with big plays (the forced fumble and two passes defended, including the fourth and 5 stop to get us the ball back for the ill-fated moribund turtle series) but who else is there? NOBODY. Booker is such a colossal disappointment. Forget the hype, on the season he's grading worse than Thomas Schaffer, Jovan Swann, and even Dylan Jackson. Let that sink in. But Herron, Miezan, and Mangum-Farrar were also guys we had big hopes for and aren't showing it. All these disappointments add up to a dire dearth of big plays. On the year, if you look at sacks, tackles for loss, interceptions, and fumbles recovered, the best we are in any of them is 97th. We are dead last in America in fumbles recovered. Speaking of which, yes, Wyrick not falling on the ball after Kelly's great hit on Otton was highly costly.
7. This game was a good example of why I'm so wistful for the lack of these big plays. We actually had a lot of defensive players play well. Kelly did his part and, while he got beat twice, that happened on a drive he salvaged to produce a turnover on downs. Damuni played as well as you can play without getting any big plays; I counted seven tackles that were solid down and distance successes. Reid harassed the QB several times, had a good run stop to start the second half, and had the 4th and 1 stuff in the 4th quarter. Williamson broke up a pass and was very good in all phases. Williams, Wyrick, Wade-Perry, Fox, and Toomer were solid. We didn't give up a touchdown until the last 21 seconds of the game. But we lost because we got crushed in the turnover margin.
8. It was a jarring moment in the post-game press conference when Shaw - in one of the darkest moods I've ever seen him - stopped his gloomy post mortem to "stop here" before answering a second question and talk about how special Yurosek is. Shaw realized he hadn't said anything positive and wasn't going to have occasion to so abruptly snapped himself out of the dirge to praise Yurosek, as was richly deserved. Yurosek is a monster. He is behind only Notre Dame's Michael Mayer as the top Power Five receiving tight end in the nation. We're not talking best TE in the conference anymore, we're already in best tight end in America conversation territory. Not that I expect to have more than 16 games left with Yurosek before he goes to the NFL, but technically he's a freshman in terms of eligibility. Monster.
9. Probably the most farcical thing about the program right now is that we have four scholarship specialists (other teams have 0-2) and are #116 in the nation in net punting. Sanborn is so godawful right now. He had the one great 50 yarder pinning Washington deep but that doesn't even begin to compensate for THREE punts of 32 yards or less, including the second week in a row in which he totally choked on the crucial punt (this time adding a delay of game on for good measure). If he has the yips there is no excuse for us to grin and bear it with another scholarship punter sitting on the bench.
10. Game balls: Yurosek, Kelly, Karty, Heffernan
11. Last night felt like a low point for the program but I think there's a fair shot we feel even lower next Friday night. How many people are going to show up for that? I haven't entirely given up on a bowl but it seems very unlikely. Even 5-7 would surprise me at this point. I hope to be shocked and to be one of the very few Stanford fans at some lowly bowl in December. However, if the next month goes more like how I expect, there's a silver lining that would probably be better for our future than pretending like 6-6 is an adequate result. I don't think anybody should tolerate the lowly state of the program right now. I expect coaching staff changes this off-season. Whether it's cosmetic or meaningful is another question and a 3-4 win season might increase the odds we get something meaningful. Even still, it's clear Shaw's mentality remains that we need to remove "errors" on both sides of the ball rather than that there's something fundamental in the team's design that holds us back. As long as that's the case I can't see the path back to relevance.
Last edited:
