https://thecardboard.org/board/ Sun, 01 Nov 2026 20:51:40 +0000 MyBB https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26384.html Sun, 01 Nov 2026 15:34:34 -0500 msqueri]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26384.html 1. The road woes continue, with little sign we belong in Power Four but at least with some signs of life. Are we the worst power team (dropped to Sagarin #97 and SP+ #118)? Yes, with Big Game shaping up to be a clash over who avoids the dunce cap. Are we playing better in the last three games than we did earlier in the season? Also yes, with scoreboard outcomes befitting #95, #61, and #118 reinforcing how miserable this team is yet undeniably also being better than the first six games befitting #83, #151, #141, #70, #233, and #182. In the big picture, it's hard to get past the bleakness of a program that's so bad that SP+ views it as competing for worst in the land in offense (with Cal), defense (with West Virginia), and special teams (with Cal and Colorado) and for which the recruiting pipeline under supposedly turnaround leadership looks like it's somehow taking a step backward. Belief in where this program is going is not very rational. Nonetheless, Luck and Pritchard aren't going anywhere and neither are the program's most incorrigible diehards. What's left to us surveying the wreckage is to find enough glimmers of hope that this interminably long crawl phase of the third post-Shaw reboot can spin its way into a better situation this offseason. The most obvious source of spin is four wins with a better than even chance for one more win. There are also obscure statistical insights such as our yards per play margin on the season being right on track with last season as the best of this bleak era. Those still inclined to saintlike patience in the belief that a rebuild from shattered foundations requires multi-year culture and program building may still choose forbearance. For the rest, it gets increasingly frustrating each game that goes on without the team showing it belongs in power football. Both camps understand that what matters much more than the games is what we do in talent acquisition after the season. But for now, games are all we have so let's turn over the stones in the rubble.

2. I came into the Louisville game with subterranean expectations and, as a result, found myself less despondent than some compatriots. We were tied with 11 minutes left in the third quarter, an entire quarter more of sticking with an opponent on the road than we've seen this season. Mathematically, garbage time didn't start until there was only 10:13 left in the game. Our -1.62 points per non-garbage drive margin was bad but much better than the -4.11 against Notre Dame, -5.04 against Wake Forest, and -2.72 against Duke. Yesterday was the first road game this season the offense even scored more than a point per drive. The defense was in the ballpark of what they allowed in the Duke and Notre Dame games. In other words, it was terrible but not quite as terrible as all the other road games. One can believe that the degree of improvement is just polishing a turd or that the longest journey begins with single steps. My vote is that there's always a greater risk Stanford's complacency and country club coddling fails to light a fire than there is that insufficient patience leads us to change course from something that would have worked. Still, I have to acknowledge yesterday wasn't as bad as the previous road humiliations.

3. Louisville is a very good team (now joining Notre Dame, Miami, and Wake Forest as Sagarin top 25 teams), coming in with a yards per play advantage over its opponents of +2.08. Unfortunately, we made them look even better, +3.70, a pretty comprehensive beating. We scored 2.18 points per non-garbage drive, making the #93 points per drive defense look like #65. We allowed 3.8 points per non-garbage drive, making the #21 points per drive offense look like #2. Not captured in either stat was another seven points coughed up on a badly-executed trick play that became a scoop and score in the opposite direction. The offense and defense both came up short relative to Louisville's norm. The Stanford offense's 5.09 yards per play is the most we've had in a road game since last September's Virginia game, but it must be noted Louisville has a crappy defense and we had about half a yard per play less than Louisville's average allowed. The other side of the ball was a contrast in terms of facing a dynamic opponent but not in terms of the subpar result. Louisville came in as one of the nation's most explosive offenses and we gave up a yard more per play than even their stellar average, giving up a whopping 8.79 yards per play. As bad as the Stanford defense has frequently been, those are the most video game numbers on a per play basis in three years, going back to the Oregon State and USC blowouts in 2023. This is the second worst yards per play margin we've had this season, ahead of only Wake Forest. The Isaac Brown 75 yard touchdown came in garbage time, so while the margin was pathetic I don't think it swamps the evidence that it was a relatively competitive road game for us. But competitive for us is still really bad.

4. The one thing that wasn't bad was the pass defense. That's hard to understand as you watch an opponent connect on passes of 44, 30, 22 (touchdown), 18 (touchdown), 18, and 19 yards, but this is an explosive opponent we contained through the air. Pass defense wasn't our problem. Louisville is fourth in the nation in yards per attempt and would have been higher today except we held them a yard and a half under their average (and also under their passer rating average). The problem was that Louisville demolished us on the ground, gaining 296 yards on a comical 8.97 yards per carry, over two and a half yards per carry more than their norm coming in. They are as explosive on the ground as they are in the air, but five of their other seven opponents did better in this phase than we did whereas five of their seven opponents did worse than us in yards per attempt and a sixth was right in our ballpark. We've seen this throughout the year that Richard's defense does better against the pass than the run. The holistic picture is ugly.

5. The passing game was also a relatively bright spot for us when we had the ball. We threw for about half a yard less per attempt than Louisville's average allowed and a slightly better passer rating than their average, and the passer rating would have been better but for an interception they snagged that hurt them. While Ford and Irvin battled, the ultimate output of our run game was quite bleak, 39 yards less than any FBS team has had against the lame Louisville run defense and the worst yards per carry of anybody, even Villanova. I had thought (hoped) that the run game had turned a corner, but this was a step backward. Between the passing and the running, while the former was better for us the commonality for both phases was a debilitating inability to convert on third downs.....2 for 16 is no way to succeed on offense. A handful of big plays kept the scoreboard interesting for a while. The underlying performance was considerably less competitive than a tie in the third quarter suggested.]]> 1. The road woes continue, with little sign we belong in Power Four but at least with some signs of life. Are we the worst power team (dropped to Sagarin #97 and SP+ #118)? Yes, with Big Game shaping up to be a clash over who avoids the dunce cap. Are we playing better in the last three games than we did earlier in the season? Also yes, with scoreboard outcomes befitting #95, #61, and #118 reinforcing how miserable this team is yet undeniably also being better than the first six games befitting #83, #151, #141, #70, #233, and #182. In the big picture, it's hard to get past the bleakness of a program that's so bad that SP+ views it as competing for worst in the land in offense (with Cal), defense (with West Virginia), and special teams (with Cal and Colorado) and for which the recruiting pipeline under supposedly turnaround leadership looks like it's somehow taking a step backward. Belief in where this program is going is not very rational. Nonetheless, Luck and Pritchard aren't going anywhere and neither are the program's most incorrigible diehards. What's left to us surveying the wreckage is to find enough glimmers of hope that this interminably long crawl phase of the third post-Shaw reboot can spin its way into a better situation this offseason. The most obvious source of spin is four wins with a better than even chance for one more win. There are also obscure statistical insights such as our yards per play margin on the season being right on track with last season as the best of this bleak era. Those still inclined to saintlike patience in the belief that a rebuild from shattered foundations requires multi-year culture and program building may still choose forbearance. For the rest, it gets increasingly frustrating each game that goes on without the team showing it belongs in power football. Both camps understand that what matters much more than the games is what we do in talent acquisition after the season. But for now, games are all we have so let's turn over the stones in the rubble.

2. I came into the Louisville game with subterranean expectations and, as a result, found myself less despondent than some compatriots. We were tied with 11 minutes left in the third quarter, an entire quarter more of sticking with an opponent on the road than we've seen this season. Mathematically, garbage time didn't start until there was only 10:13 left in the game. Our -1.62 points per non-garbage drive margin was bad but much better than the -4.11 against Notre Dame, -5.04 against Wake Forest, and -2.72 against Duke. Yesterday was the first road game this season the offense even scored more than a point per drive. The defense was in the ballpark of what they allowed in the Duke and Notre Dame games. In other words, it was terrible but not quite as terrible as all the other road games. One can believe that the degree of improvement is just polishing a turd or that the longest journey begins with single steps. My vote is that there's always a greater risk Stanford's complacency and country club coddling fails to light a fire than there is that insufficient patience leads us to change course from something that would have worked. Still, I have to acknowledge yesterday wasn't as bad as the previous road humiliations.

3. Louisville is a very good team (now joining Notre Dame, Miami, and Wake Forest as Sagarin top 25 teams), coming in with a yards per play advantage over its opponents of +2.08. Unfortunately, we made them look even better, +3.70, a pretty comprehensive beating. We scored 2.18 points per non-garbage drive, making the #93 points per drive defense look like #65. We allowed 3.8 points per non-garbage drive, making the #21 points per drive offense look like #2. Not captured in either stat was another seven points coughed up on a badly-executed trick play that became a scoop and score in the opposite direction. The offense and defense both came up short relative to Louisville's norm. The Stanford offense's 5.09 yards per play is the most we've had in a road game since last September's Virginia game, but it must be noted Louisville has a crappy defense and we had about half a yard per play less than Louisville's average allowed. The other side of the ball was a contrast in terms of facing a dynamic opponent but not in terms of the subpar result. Louisville came in as one of the nation's most explosive offenses and we gave up a yard more per play than even their stellar average, giving up a whopping 8.79 yards per play. As bad as the Stanford defense has frequently been, those are the most video game numbers on a per play basis in three years, going back to the Oregon State and USC blowouts in 2023. This is the second worst yards per play margin we've had this season, ahead of only Wake Forest. The Isaac Brown 75 yard touchdown came in garbage time, so while the margin was pathetic I don't think it swamps the evidence that it was a relatively competitive road game for us. But competitive for us is still really bad.

4. The one thing that wasn't bad was the pass defense. That's hard to understand as you watch an opponent connect on passes of 44, 30, 22 (touchdown), 18 (touchdown), 18, and 19 yards, but this is an explosive opponent we contained through the air. Pass defense wasn't our problem. Louisville is fourth in the nation in yards per attempt and would have been higher today except we held them a yard and a half under their average (and also under their passer rating average). The problem was that Louisville demolished us on the ground, gaining 296 yards on a comical 8.97 yards per carry, over two and a half yards per carry more than their norm coming in. They are as explosive on the ground as they are in the air, but five of their other seven opponents did better in this phase than we did whereas five of their seven opponents did worse than us in yards per attempt and a sixth was right in our ballpark. We've seen this throughout the year that Richard's defense does better against the pass than the run. The holistic picture is ugly.

5. The passing game was also a relatively bright spot for us when we had the ball. We threw for about half a yard less per attempt than Louisville's average allowed and a slightly better passer rating than their average, and the passer rating would have been better but for an interception they snagged that hurt them. While Ford and Irvin battled, the ultimate output of our run game was quite bleak, 39 yards less than any FBS team has had against the lame Louisville run defense and the worst yards per carry of anybody, even Villanova. I had thought (hoped) that the run game had turned a corner, but this was a step backward. Between the passing and the running, while the former was better for us the commonality for both phases was a debilitating inability to convert on third downs.....2 for 16 is no way to succeed on offense. A handful of big plays kept the scoreboard interesting for a while. The underlying performance was considerably less competitive than a tie in the third quarter suggested.]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26382.html Sun, 01 Nov 2026 11:05:58 -0500 BobK]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26382.html https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26381.html Sat, 31 Oct 2026 19:12:48 -0400 cardcrimson]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26381.html
Another bad decision, why when we're getting blown out like today, is Tavita not putting in the backups? Give them some time!]]>
Another bad decision, why when we're getting blown out like today, is Tavita not putting in the backups? Give them some time!]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26380.html Sat, 31 Oct 2026 15:26:40 -0400 newguy]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26380.html https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26379.html Fri, 30 Oct 2026 10:48:23 -0400 BobK]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26379.html The Women start soon

---

Sadly Stanford’s top two Women runners aren't running
Kennedy and Bunnage. They haven’t run this season. Hope was they start now]]> The Women start soon

---

Sadly Stanford’s top two Women runners aren't running
Kennedy and Bunnage. They haven’t run this season. Hope was they start now]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26378.html Thu, 29 Oct 2026 15:52:01 -0400 ADPinWDC]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26378.html This is Separation week for ACC Championship. 
The ranked teams above us will each win: 
#1 MIAM, #14 WAKE, #19 SMU. 
SMU hosts WAKE on Nov. 14 for the "play-in" game vs MIAM.
QB Mensah will be in ACC Champ game two years in a row.
And teams below Stanford will lose this weekend. 
Teams with three losses will fight for Bowl eligibility. 

VTEC (6-2) has a bye now.  Then they visit SMU on Nov 6.  Then they host us. 
Beating VTEC and CALSucks is our only path to SIX wins. 
I do not think we beat @LOUV nor SMU in PA to finish. 
Yes, 5-7 would be "acceptable" for Pritchard's first year.
Settling for 4-8 would be "Meh", subpar -- finishing with four losses.   No juice in recruiting. 
Harbaugh went 4-8 in 2007; then 5-7 in 2008. 

The breakthrough with Gerhart and Luck was 2009, including the big beat down of USC in the Coliseum.   
Then the Golden BCS years:  2010-2017, where we went 85W-21L.  In 2010, Harbaugh's last year, we went 12-1
With Luck & Hogan, Gerhart, Taylor, McCaffrey, BLove.  Three Rose Bowls.
And the best O-Lines in Stanford history, plus solid defense.]]> This is Separation week for ACC Championship. 
The ranked teams above us will each win: 
#1 MIAM, #14 WAKE, #19 SMU. 
SMU hosts WAKE on Nov. 14 for the "play-in" game vs MIAM.
QB Mensah will be in ACC Champ game two years in a row.
And teams below Stanford will lose this weekend. 
Teams with three losses will fight for Bowl eligibility. 

VTEC (6-2) has a bye now.  Then they visit SMU on Nov 6.  Then they host us. 
Beating VTEC and CALSucks is our only path to SIX wins. 
I do not think we beat @LOUV nor SMU in PA to finish. 
Yes, 5-7 would be "acceptable" for Pritchard's first year.
Settling for 4-8 would be "Meh", subpar -- finishing with four losses.   No juice in recruiting. 
Harbaugh went 4-8 in 2007; then 5-7 in 2008. 

The breakthrough with Gerhart and Luck was 2009, including the big beat down of USC in the Coliseum.   
Then the Golden BCS years:  2010-2017, where we went 85W-21L.  In 2010, Harbaugh's last year, we went 12-1
With Luck & Hogan, Gerhart, Taylor, McCaffrey, BLove.  Three Rose Bowls.
And the best O-Lines in Stanford history, plus solid defense.]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26377.html Wed, 28 Oct 2026 21:12:03 -0400 CompSci87]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26377.html https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26376.html Tue, 27 Oct 2026 23:55:32 -0400 george]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26376.html
Also, how much nickname mileage are we gonna get out this matchup?  Can't wait to see how folks manage that extra S.  Speaking of nicknames, DON'T FORGET TO VOTE!  (we aren't getting as much participation in the nickname voting as I'd hoped).]]>
Also, how much nickname mileage are we gonna get out this matchup?  Can't wait to see how folks manage that extra S.  Speaking of nicknames, DON'T FORGET TO VOTE!  (we aren't getting as much participation in the nickname voting as I'd hoped).]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26375.html Sun, 25 Oct 2026 15:41:48 -0400 Mick]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26375.html
He needs to come to Quarterback U. to learn from Tavita...

Buzz builds about Arch Manning foregoing NFL Draft — and possibly leaving Texas]]>
He needs to come to Quarterback U. to learn from Tavita...

Buzz builds about Arch Manning foregoing NFL Draft — and possibly leaving Texas]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26374.html Sat, 24 Oct 2026 20:34:37 -0400 BostonCard]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26374.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1aOgRKw...eRefresh=1

I really want to know what they were actually thinking when they greenlit this idea.

BC]]>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1aOgRKw...eRefresh=1

I really want to know what they were actually thinking when they greenlit this idea.

BC]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26373.html Sat, 24 Oct 2026 19:22:30 -0400 cctop]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26373.html https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...4th-season

Which poster was it who said they look forward to the day that losing to us was no longer a reason to fire your coach?]]> https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...4th-season

Which poster was it who said they look forward to the day that losing to us was no longer a reason to fire your coach?]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26372.html Sat, 24 Oct 2026 18:44:47 -0400 BostonCard]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26372.html
BC

---

Cincinanati upset #8 Texas Tech 37-24 with former Stanford running back going for 173 yards on 16 carries and a TD.

Otherwise, most games went as expected; Indiana was taken to OT by Michigan, but won 13-6.  Georgia Tech was leading BC at halftime, but it has been all Eagles since then, and they are up 49-27 late in the fourth.  Miami beat Pittsburgh handily.  SMU had its way with Cal in the second half.

BC

---

Unbelievable.... on fourth and goal from the one, with 1:42 left, UCF goes for it and BYU holds them.

BC

---

UCF gets the ball back, looks like they fumble the ball, but it is overturned as an incomplete pass (plus there is a 15 yard penalty) that takes it into field goal range.  Scott Frost's UCF has a chance to win it with a 45 yard field goal if my math is right.

BC

---

And the kick is blocked.

BC]]>
BC

---

Cincinanati upset #8 Texas Tech 37-24 with former Stanford running back going for 173 yards on 16 carries and a TD.

Otherwise, most games went as expected; Indiana was taken to OT by Michigan, but won 13-6.  Georgia Tech was leading BC at halftime, but it has been all Eagles since then, and they are up 49-27 late in the fourth.  Miami beat Pittsburgh handily.  SMU had its way with Cal in the second half.

BC

---

Unbelievable.... on fourth and goal from the one, with 1:42 left, UCF goes for it and BYU holds them.

BC

---

UCF gets the ball back, looks like they fumble the ball, but it is overturned as an incomplete pass (plus there is a 15 yard penalty) that takes it into field goal range.  Scott Frost's UCF has a chance to win it with a 45 yard field goal if my math is right.

BC

---

And the kick is blocked.

BC]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26371.html Sat, 24 Oct 2026 17:06:30 -0400 msqueri]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26371.html 1. That was fun for the few who bothered to watch. This is the kind of competent plucking of low-hanging fruit that if we start doing enough of maybe we can bring a bushel to market someday. With NC State not good, heavily injured, traveling cross-country to play at a bad time of day, and deprived of an important touchdown by a questionable penalty, we had a lot working in our favor. We capitalized. In many senses this was similar to the Georgia Tech game. The bottom line is we won both of them. Many have rightly pointed out the duality of being .500 tied for the most wins we've had in a season this era while also being an objectively bad team with no fans. The main thought I have coming out of last night is the reason it seems like a complex duality is that we've actually managed to win some games. That sure beats the alternative. All teams have to face headwinds and tailwinds and it's ultimately the results that matter. We won and played better yesterday. We now have four wins with legitimate prospects for more. Happy days by our standards.

2. My last thought last week was challenging the team to look like an FBS team two games in a row for the first time under Pritchard. They surpassed that by looking like a Power Four team for only the second time this season. This was the second best scoreboard outcome of the Pritchard era, a score befitting a top 70 team (Georgia Tech was befitting a top 60 team). Most encouraging to me is not only have we won half our games this year, we've done better than the opponent in yards per play in each of those wins. We only did that twice last year, once in 2024, twice in 2023, once in 2022, and three times in 2021. As a result, even as bad as the blowout losses have been, this is by far our best year of the era in overall yards per play margin, -0.94 compared to last year's -1.23, which itself was better than the prior four years. While I lament that Pritchard has yet to have what I would call a good game (a scoreboard outcome befitting a top 25 team at least for one day....at the bare minimum teams should occasionally be able to look top 40), we are seeing some underlying signs of progress.

3. One area not progressing is attendance. Others have beaten this horse but I have to get some licks in too. It's just too existential of a question of why bother to field a major team if nobody cares. Throughout last year I had a thesis that winning at home would build habits of community and gradually build back enthusiasm as fans got used to leaving Stanford stadium happy. On top of that, our administrators have focused on game experience with theme nights, concessions, cabanas, concerts, new stadium lighting, and other bells and whistles. What we've seen so far is Stanford winning nine of our last 12 home games (!!!!), owning the C-House, and yet despite the winning and the investment, nobody comes to the games. Elon and NC State were as bad as it's ever been. Attendance can lag results by years - and our overall results still feed a narrative of the worst team in Power Four - but I admit that what we've seen with attendance is disheartening. I am not sure Stanford will ever have enthusiasm around the program (again, have won nine of the last 12 home games!). All there is to do is keep plugging away and hope winning and attendant improvements to the program somehow revive the corpse. Because this isn't The Library, it's The Mausoleum (hat tip @anurag41).

4. While the defense made enough stops not to screw it up, this game was clearly won by the offense. We scored 3.44 points per drive (excluding the victory formation), scoring like the #11 points per drive offense whereas our season level is the #123 offense. There's a big enemy gets a vote element here, as NC State came in a terrible #115 in points per drive defense and will now fall further after we made them look like #128. Still, it's nice to score and we scored more than their norm allowed. The defense gave up 3.11 points per drive (excluding the last play of the first half), defending like the #120 defense (on the season we're #133) and making NC State's offense look like the #23 points per drive offense whereas they came in #53. We had the most yards per play of the Pritchard era against an FBS opponent, slightly shy of the Elon mark, and the fewest yards per play allowed in ACC play this season. Here too the offense was the impressive part, getting more than half a yard per play more than NC State's average allowed (notably, better than Wake Forest and Virginia did). The defense held NC State just slightly under its norm but that's misleading because it's entirely a function of the Richmond blowout. No FBS team has defended NC State as poorly as we did. I don't want to overdraw this point as we were within 0.3 yards per play allowed of Vanderbilt, Appalachian State, and Louisville, but those are bad defenses so that's kind of cold comfort. The bottom line is the offense came to play and the defense did just enough to hang on. There remains nothing good to say about the job Kris Richard has done.

5. The offense's success was balanced and very fun to watch. It was the second or third best passing performance of the season across metrics. While it was only middle-of-the-road compared to what NC State's atrocious pass defense typically allows, that's good enough for a lot of yards and touchdowns because, again, atrocious pass D. The run game built on its Elon confidence boost and is coming alive, pivotal for the second straight game. NC State has a bad run defense but even still we had almost a yard per carry more than their average allowed, better than all but Louisville and Vanderbilt, the latter of which we weren't far behind. I won't crow too much because Vandy has a terrible run game and still outgained us per carry and NC State is not much resistance to run games. Nonetheless, the salient comparison in my view is how we ran against the bad Georgia Tech defense in an extremely similar game (poorly) versus how we did in this game (well, well over double as effective). The run game is improving. If we keep it up, the Cal and SMU games will both be winnable.

6. Defense didn't thrive. Louisville is the only FBS team to give up a worse yard per attempt to the Wolfpack, though Louisville, App State, and Vandy all gave up slightly worse passer rating. We were basically in the ballpark of subpar pass defenses. The run defense was almost identical in every stat to how we did against Miami, better than all but Hawaii (Miami, by the way, is one of the top rushing teams in America, so it remains an oddity that we bottled them up on the ground....of course they didn't need it). This is one area I am going to just come out and say we got super lucky on the timing of this game (on the schedule and on the kickoff time) to play backups at running back and across the offensive line, including a third (or fourth?) center. NC State's run game has quite understandably imploded in the face of injury. Compared to their last two opponents, we gave up six times as many yards per carry as Wake Forest and over a yard more per carry than Louisville. Vandy is the only power team to do worse in run defense. This was just luck.]]> 1. That was fun for the few who bothered to watch. This is the kind of competent plucking of low-hanging fruit that if we start doing enough of maybe we can bring a bushel to market someday. With NC State not good, heavily injured, traveling cross-country to play at a bad time of day, and deprived of an important touchdown by a questionable penalty, we had a lot working in our favor. We capitalized. In many senses this was similar to the Georgia Tech game. The bottom line is we won both of them. Many have rightly pointed out the duality of being .500 tied for the most wins we've had in a season this era while also being an objectively bad team with no fans. The main thought I have coming out of last night is the reason it seems like a complex duality is that we've actually managed to win some games. That sure beats the alternative. All teams have to face headwinds and tailwinds and it's ultimately the results that matter. We won and played better yesterday. We now have four wins with legitimate prospects for more. Happy days by our standards.

2. My last thought last week was challenging the team to look like an FBS team two games in a row for the first time under Pritchard. They surpassed that by looking like a Power Four team for only the second time this season. This was the second best scoreboard outcome of the Pritchard era, a score befitting a top 70 team (Georgia Tech was befitting a top 60 team). Most encouraging to me is not only have we won half our games this year, we've done better than the opponent in yards per play in each of those wins. We only did that twice last year, once in 2024, twice in 2023, once in 2022, and three times in 2021. As a result, even as bad as the blowout losses have been, this is by far our best year of the era in overall yards per play margin, -0.94 compared to last year's -1.23, which itself was better than the prior four years. While I lament that Pritchard has yet to have what I would call a good game (a scoreboard outcome befitting a top 25 team at least for one day....at the bare minimum teams should occasionally be able to look top 40), we are seeing some underlying signs of progress.

3. One area not progressing is attendance. Others have beaten this horse but I have to get some licks in too. It's just too existential of a question of why bother to field a major team if nobody cares. Throughout last year I had a thesis that winning at home would build habits of community and gradually build back enthusiasm as fans got used to leaving Stanford stadium happy. On top of that, our administrators have focused on game experience with theme nights, concessions, cabanas, concerts, new stadium lighting, and other bells and whistles. What we've seen so far is Stanford winning nine of our last 12 home games (!!!!), owning the C-House, and yet despite the winning and the investment, nobody comes to the games. Elon and NC State were as bad as it's ever been. Attendance can lag results by years - and our overall results still feed a narrative of the worst team in Power Four - but I admit that what we've seen with attendance is disheartening. I am not sure Stanford will ever have enthusiasm around the program (again, have won nine of the last 12 home games!). All there is to do is keep plugging away and hope winning and attendant improvements to the program somehow revive the corpse. Because this isn't The Library, it's The Mausoleum (hat tip @anurag41).

4. While the defense made enough stops not to screw it up, this game was clearly won by the offense. We scored 3.44 points per drive (excluding the victory formation), scoring like the #11 points per drive offense whereas our season level is the #123 offense. There's a big enemy gets a vote element here, as NC State came in a terrible #115 in points per drive defense and will now fall further after we made them look like #128. Still, it's nice to score and we scored more than their norm allowed. The defense gave up 3.11 points per drive (excluding the last play of the first half), defending like the #120 defense (on the season we're #133) and making NC State's offense look like the #23 points per drive offense whereas they came in #53. We had the most yards per play of the Pritchard era against an FBS opponent, slightly shy of the Elon mark, and the fewest yards per play allowed in ACC play this season. Here too the offense was the impressive part, getting more than half a yard per play more than NC State's average allowed (notably, better than Wake Forest and Virginia did). The defense held NC State just slightly under its norm but that's misleading because it's entirely a function of the Richmond blowout. No FBS team has defended NC State as poorly as we did. I don't want to overdraw this point as we were within 0.3 yards per play allowed of Vanderbilt, Appalachian State, and Louisville, but those are bad defenses so that's kind of cold comfort. The bottom line is the offense came to play and the defense did just enough to hang on. There remains nothing good to say about the job Kris Richard has done.

5. The offense's success was balanced and very fun to watch. It was the second or third best passing performance of the season across metrics. While it was only middle-of-the-road compared to what NC State's atrocious pass defense typically allows, that's good enough for a lot of yards and touchdowns because, again, atrocious pass D. The run game built on its Elon confidence boost and is coming alive, pivotal for the second straight game. NC State has a bad run defense but even still we had almost a yard per carry more than their average allowed, better than all but Louisville and Vanderbilt, the latter of which we weren't far behind. I won't crow too much because Vandy has a terrible run game and still outgained us per carry and NC State is not much resistance to run games. Nonetheless, the salient comparison in my view is how we ran against the bad Georgia Tech defense in an extremely similar game (poorly) versus how we did in this game (well, well over double as effective). The run game is improving. If we keep it up, the Cal and SMU games will both be winnable.

6. Defense didn't thrive. Louisville is the only FBS team to give up a worse yard per attempt to the Wolfpack, though Louisville, App State, and Vandy all gave up slightly worse passer rating. We were basically in the ballpark of subpar pass defenses. The run defense was almost identical in every stat to how we did against Miami, better than all but Hawaii (Miami, by the way, is one of the top rushing teams in America, so it remains an oddity that we bottled them up on the ground....of course they didn't need it). This is one area I am going to just come out and say we got super lucky on the timing of this game (on the schedule and on the kickoff time) to play backups at running back and across the offensive line, including a third (or fourth?) center. NC State's run game has quite understandably imploded in the face of injury. Compared to their last two opponents, we gave up six times as many yards per carry as Wake Forest and over a yard more per carry than Louisville. Vandy is the only power team to do worse in run defense. This was just luck.]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26370.html Sat, 24 Oct 2026 16:54:11 -0400 82lsju]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26370.html Quote:After reports surfaced that Cal football head coach Tosh Lupoi had still not officially signed a contract with UC Berkeley, The Daily Californian obtained a copy of the first-year head coach’s contract, which was finalized Oct. 1.

For each of Lupoi’s five seasons — December 2025 to January 2031 — his base salary is listed at $275,000 per year. However, the bulk of the compensation comes in what the contract refers to as “Talent Fee,” which is to be paid out as Lupoi fulfills his off-the-field obligations, such as speaking at university events and television appearances. The annual guaranteed talent fee for the five seasons averages $4,225,000.

This brings Lupoi’s total guaranteed compensation to $22,600,000, or $4,500,000 annually, across the full contract. Also included was a one-time signing bonus of $100,000.

Notably, if the university chooses to fire Lupoi before the end of his contract, the buyout necessary would be a minimum of 80% of the remaining base salary and talent fee.

Cal has also agreed to pay the initiation fee and dues of any country club Lupoi wants to join.
https://www.dailycal.org/sports/msports/...78dbe.html]]> Quote:After reports surfaced that Cal football head coach Tosh Lupoi had still not officially signed a contract with UC Berkeley, The Daily Californian obtained a copy of the first-year head coach’s contract, which was finalized Oct. 1.

For each of Lupoi’s five seasons — December 2025 to January 2031 — his base salary is listed at $275,000 per year. However, the bulk of the compensation comes in what the contract refers to as “Talent Fee,” which is to be paid out as Lupoi fulfills his off-the-field obligations, such as speaking at university events and television appearances. The annual guaranteed talent fee for the five seasons averages $4,225,000.

This brings Lupoi’s total guaranteed compensation to $22,600,000, or $4,500,000 annually, across the full contract. Also included was a one-time signing bonus of $100,000.

Notably, if the university chooses to fire Lupoi before the end of his contract, the buyout necessary would be a minimum of 80% of the remaining base salary and talent fee.

Cal has also agreed to pay the initiation fee and dues of any country club Lupoi wants to join.
https://www.dailycal.org/sports/msports/...78dbe.html]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26369.html Sat, 24 Oct 2026 11:43:02 -0400 Mick]]> https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26369.html
Our remaining opponents, next three on the road:

Louisville at Louisville next Saturday, Halloween. They're 4-3, #22 in the same ranking. 12:15 kickoff, Kentucky is in the Eastern time zone, 9:15 a.m. body clock time. Tough game. Beat SMU 41-31. Wake Forest beat them by three, but they lost to NC State by three. This is after a bye week for them.

Virginia Tech, #40 in the rankings. Minor saving grace, it's after our bye week. Va Tech lost to cal, 25-20.

Cal/Big Game in Berkeley. Cal is #98 in the same rankings. Anything can happen in the Big Game.

SMU at Stanford. SMU is 5-1 now, but 1-1 on the road. Lost to Louisville in Louisville, 41-31. #23 in the same rankings.

Cal plays at SMU this morning, kickoff in 1/2 hour. Should be interesting

I think we'd have to beat Cal and VaTech (most likely) for a bowl bid. The ACC doesn't have real rigid bowl game slots, so a 6-6 ACC team might get the Military Bowl in Annapolis, or the Fenway Bowl in Boston as the two most likely bids. Second most likely would be the JLab Birmingham Bowl in Birmingham AL or the Gasparilla Bowl in Tampa. This based on the 2024 and 2025 bowl results for the ACC.]]>
Our remaining opponents, next three on the road:

Louisville at Louisville next Saturday, Halloween. They're 4-3, #22 in the same ranking. 12:15 kickoff, Kentucky is in the Eastern time zone, 9:15 a.m. body clock time. Tough game. Beat SMU 41-31. Wake Forest beat them by three, but they lost to NC State by three. This is after a bye week for them.

Virginia Tech, #40 in the rankings. Minor saving grace, it's after our bye week. Va Tech lost to cal, 25-20.

Cal/Big Game in Berkeley. Cal is #98 in the same rankings. Anything can happen in the Big Game.

SMU at Stanford. SMU is 5-1 now, but 1-1 on the road. Lost to Louisville in Louisville, 41-31. #23 in the same rankings.

Cal plays at SMU this morning, kickoff in 1/2 hour. Should be interesting

I think we'd have to beat Cal and VaTech (most likely) for a bowl bid. The ACC doesn't have real rigid bowl game slots, so a 6-6 ACC team might get the Military Bowl in Annapolis, or the Fenway Bowl in Boston as the two most likely bids. Second most likely would be the JLab Birmingham Bowl in Birmingham AL or the Gasparilla Bowl in Tampa. This based on the 2024 and 2025 bowl results for the ACC.]]>