[CTcard]

The penalty problem really does upset me.  Wright, yet again, had a drive killing penalty with his personal foul to stall out our 4th quarter drive.  He is also the person that has been flagged for two critical hi-low chop block penalties - one of which called back a potentially game winning TD versus U$€.    That's poor judgement, especially the kick, for an experienced player.

Kicking the other guy in the pile up was a horrendous error in letting one's emotion get the best of you. That personal foul was atrocious. The chop block vs S.-C. was primarily an egregious error by the referee. On that play, I am certain that Wright did exactly as he is taught to do, and in fact made a good and legal block. If any Stanford player is to blame it is Garnett who waved at the SC lineman after he got beat and put the idea of the illegal chop into the ref's head.
I didn't see the chop block vs UW - my impression was that folks thought it was a reasonable call.

As for the O-line, they did not come together like the TWU of old.  Too many holes, holds and missed blocks.  How you can let their best player come in and sack Hogan untouched from the edge is beyond me.  I think he had 3-4 sacks.  I continue to believe this is the biggest problem and one that could be mitigated if our OC was focused on the performance of the line and not being our OC.  He's too stretched and it shows.

True, but the TWU didn't come together all at once either.
There are times where the line loses man-up, but they do seem to have some strengths. One of those is actually moving their man on run blocking. One of the reasons I am not happy with our abandonment of the power run game.

Orchard had 3.5 sacks.
0.5 - he beat Murphy though Murphy actually blocked him okay - but Hogan held the ball way too long.
1. Peat blocked him initially - Orchard made a move to the inside - Peat seemed to expect to hand him of Garnett who had disappeared to the outside to block nobody.
2. Peat got beat on a nice move to the outside. Again, perhaps Hogan had time to get rid of the ball, but not much.
3. In OT, Peat went upfield to block for what was going to be a screen pass to McCaffrey. Nobody bothered with Orchard coming in off the end. Clearly a miscommunication. Not completely sure whose fault it was. 

So, the four sacks were a combination of guys being beat, guys not communicating, and Hogan not getting rid of the ball. Ouch.

As for the Defense, they are tired!  Tired of having to pitch strong performances to make up for our lack luster offense that is prone to turning the ball over.  The D is clearly not as sharp as they were in the first half of the season.

I don't think that adequately describes the defense. Mostly the D has been great, with some break downs at key moments and getting trucked by Oregon from play 1. There was no particular reason to be tired on the first series vs Oregon, and there was no reason to be more tired than the Utah defense in OT - Stanford had run more plays and held the ball for more time than did Utah (32 1/2 minutes vs 27 1/2 minutes). If the problem were getting worn down over the course of the season then I wouldn't have expected them to shut down Utah as they did, particularly Utah's strength in the run game.

I don't see any particular reason for the "defense is tired" argument, unless you mean ennui.

Either we get up for Big Game or this season will be chalked up as one of the biggest disappointments for Stanford football since I've been a fan.  UCB will be up for this game and if Shaw and co can't get our guys up for it, then it's going to be a long afternoon in Strawberry Canyon.

Apparently I've been a fan longer than you have.
But yeah, it's a disappointing season.

[CTcard]

The penalty problem really does upset me.  Wright, yet again, had a drive killing penalty with his personal foul to stall out our 4th quarter drive.  He is also the person that has been flagged for two critical hi-low chop block penalties - one of which called back a potentially game winning TD versus U$€.    That's poor judgement, especially the kick, for an experienced player.

Kicking the other guy in the pile up was a horrendous error in letting one's emotion get the best of you. That personal foul was atrocious. The chop block vs S.-C. was primarily an egregious error by the referee. On that play, I am certain that Wright did exactly as he is taught to do, and in fact made a good and legal block. If any Stanford player is to blame it is Garnett who waved at the SC lineman after he got beat and put the idea of the illegal chop into the ref's head.
I didn't see the chop block vs UW - my impression was that folks thought it was a reasonable call.

As for the O-line, they did not come together like the TWU of old.  Too many holes, holds and missed blocks.  How you can let their best player come in and sack Hogan untouched from the edge is beyond me.  I think he had 3-4 sacks.  I continue to believe this is the biggest problem and one that could be mitigated if our OC was focused on the performance of the line and not being our OC.  He's too stretched and it shows.

True, but the TWU didn't come together all at once either.
There are times where the line loses man-up, but they do seem to have some strengths. One of those is actually moving their man on run blocking. One of the reasons I am not happy with our abandonment of the power run game.

Orchard had 3.5 sacks.
0.5 - he beat Murphy though Murphy actually blocked him okay - but Hogan held the ball way too long.
1. Peat blocked him initially - Orchard made a move to the inside - Peat seemed to expect to hand him of Garnett who had disappeared to the outside to block nobody.
2. Peat got beat on a nice move to the outside. Again, perhaps Hogan had time to get rid of the ball, but not much.
3. In OT, Peat went upfield to block for what was going to be a screen pass to McCaffrey. Nobody bothered with Orchard coming in off the end. Clearly a miscommunication. Not completely sure whose fault it was. 

So, the four sacks were a combination of guys being beat, guys not communicating, and Hogan not getting rid of the ball. Ouch.

As for the Defense, they are tired!  Tired of having to pitch strong performances to make up for our lack luster offense that is prone to turning the ball over.  The D is clearly not as sharp as they were in the first half of the season.

I don't think that adequately describes the defense. Mostly the D has been great, with some break downs at key moments and getting trucked by Oregon from play 1. There was no particular reason to be tired on the first series vs Oregon, and there was no reason to be more tired than the Utah defense in OT - Stanford had run more plays and held the ball for more time than did Utah (32 1/2 minutes vs 27 1/2 minutes). If the problem were getting worn down over the course of the season then I wouldn't have expected them to shut down Utah as they did, particularly Utah's strength in the run game.

I don't see any particular reason for the "defense is tired" argument, unless you mean ennui.

Either we get up for Big Game or this season will be chalked up as one of the biggest disappointments for Stanford football since I've been a fan.  UCB will be up for this game and if Shaw and co can't get our guys up for it, then it's going to be a long afternoon in Strawberry Canyon.

Apparently I've been a fan longer than you have.
But yeah, it's a disappointing season.