[OutsiderFan]

Of course, had Stanford won, nobody could take issue with anything, but...

Was anyone else a little non-plussed by the fact Stanford's offense played to Oregon's defensive strength, as opposed to its weakness?  Oregon is much better equipped to stop the run than the pass this year.  This to me was one of those games where it would have been smart to pass more.

I really have to take issue with the fact Irwin hardly ever plays or gets his number called, and then he's the go-to guy on the most important possession of the season.  Maybe if he was used in the same role early in the game, the result is different?

It's awesome to be able to possess the ball and run it if you can, but against Oregon, points are critical, and you score points with the passing game.  In a year they have a bad pass defense, this was a great opportunity missed.

[OutsiderFan]

Of course, had Stanford won, nobody could take issue with anything, but...

Was anyone else a little non-plussed by the fact Stanford's offense played to Oregon's defensive strength, as opposed to its weakness?  Oregon is much better equipped to stop the run than the pass this year.  This to me was one of those games where it would have been smart to pass more.

I really have to take issue with the fact Irwin hardly ever plays or gets his number called, and then he's the go-to guy on the most important possession of the season.  Maybe if he was used in the same role early in the game, the result is different?

It's awesome to be able to possess the ball and run it if you can, but against Oregon, points are critical, and you score points with the passing game.  In a year they have a bad pass defense, this was a great opportunity missed.

[cardfan77]

Exactly my thought during the entire game. Throw the ball!

[cardfan77]

Exactly my thought during the entire game. Throw the ball!

[martyup]

Was anyone else a little non-plussed by the fact Stanford's offense played to Oregon's defensive strength, as opposed to its weakness? 

No.

[martyup]

Was anyone else a little non-plussed by the fact Stanford's offense played to Oregon's defensive strength, as opposed to its weakness? 

No.

[Nan3cy]

I was more disappointed in the execution.. TWO fumbles snaps, plus an interception??

[Nan3cy]

I was more disappointed in the execution.. TWO fumbles snaps, plus an interception??

[jacketree]

He missed some wide open guys including a TD. Not his greatest game ever, but there will be others.

[jacketree]

He missed some wide open guys including a TD. Not his greatest game ever, but there will be others.

[cardcoug]

Yeah I think the plan was fine. And despite the defense's ineptitude for most of the game, they held 3 times in a row in the 4th. The game was there for the taking several times and we just dropped it.

[cardcoug]

Yeah I think the plan was fine. And despite the defense's ineptitude for most of the game, they held 3 times in a row in the 4th. The game was there for the taking several times and we just dropped it.

[cardcrimson]

Missed all of the game on tv, and only caught the last couple minutes on the radio. Ted and Todd seemed to quite non-plussed. Todd mentioned that the plays to Rector had been open all night and then Ted commented that if the offense went without a receiver again, Todd would have gone down to the field himself. Catching only the last two drives, it certainly seemed as if the offense was able to throw the ball quite well.

[cardcrimson]

Missed all of the game on tv, and only caught the last couple minutes on the radio. Ted and Todd seemed to quite non-plussed. Todd mentioned that the plays to Rector had been open all night and then Ted commented that if the offense went without a receiver again, Todd would have gone down to the field himself. Catching only the last two drives, it certainly seemed as if the offense was able to throw the ball quite well.

[stupac2]

Yup. We make that FG after half, we win. We turn either of the short FGs into TDs, we win. We don't fumble those snaps, we probably win. For Oregon to win they needed to play a near flawless game and have us make mistakes, and that's what happened. Oh well, we're still alive for the Rose Bowl and it's hard to be disappointed in that.

[stupac2]

Yup. We make that FG after half, we win. We turn either of the short FGs into TDs, we win. We don't fumble those snaps, we probably win. For Oregon to win they needed to play a near flawless game and have us make mistakes, and that's what happened. Oh well, we're still alive for the Rose Bowl and it's hard to be disappointed in that.

[BostonCard]

A week after Cal shot itself in the foot by trying too hard to pass, when the running game was going well, it's a little hard to be too disappointed with a running game that did reasonably well.  For most of the game, we had a pretty balanced attack.

I do agree with you that Oregon was having real trouble covering Rector all game. And maybe if we throw a bit more, a bit earlier, that the lanes would have been a touch more open.  But really, the offense netted us 500-plus yards, so overall, it did its job.  The problem was the mistakes.... Some very untimely penalties, a failure to punch it in from first and goal at the 9 after the interception, and of course, the fumbled snaps.  A cleaner game by the offense wins.

On the other hand, give the Oregon offense some credit.  For three quarters of the game, they had our defense looking completely overmatched.  We did adjust successfully, stopping them in the fourth quarter when we needed stops, but it was too little, too late.

BC

[BostonCard]

A week after Cal shot itself in the foot by trying too hard to pass, when the running game was going well, it's a little hard to be too disappointed with a running game that did reasonably well.  For most of the game, we had a pretty balanced attack.

I do agree with you that Oregon was having real trouble covering Rector all game. And maybe if we throw a bit more, a bit earlier, that the lanes would have been a touch more open.  But really, the offense netted us 500-plus yards, so overall, it did its job.  The problem was the mistakes.... Some very untimely penalties, a failure to punch it in from first and goal at the 9 after the interception, and of course, the fumbled snaps.  A cleaner game by the offense wins.

On the other hand, give the Oregon offense some credit.  For three quarters of the game, they had our defense looking completely overmatched.  We did adjust successfully, stopping them in the fourth quarter when we needed stops, but it was too little, too late.

BC

[winflop]

A week after Low APR U shot itself in the foot by trying too hard to pass, when the running game was going well, it's a little hard to be too disappointed with a running game that did reasonably well.  For most of the game, we had a pretty balanced attack.

BC

But why was there a need for that balanced an attack when running off tackle or between the tackles was racking up 4+ yards on almost every snap?  I would have liked about a 70/30 mix (60/40 at least) with more play action.

But that's way down the list of the reasons Stanford lost - along with the questionable decision to try a 45yd FG on 4th & 2.  Both way below the on-field execution errors

[winflop]

A week after Low APR U shot itself in the foot by trying too hard to pass, when the running game was going well, it's a little hard to be too disappointed with a running game that did reasonably well.  For most of the game, we had a pretty balanced attack.

BC

But why was there a need for that balanced an attack when running off tackle or between the tackles was racking up 4+ yards on almost every snap?  I would have liked about a 70/30 mix (60/40 at least) with more play action.

But that's way down the list of the reasons Stanford lost - along with the questionable decision to try a 45yd FG on 4th & 2.  Both way below the on-field execution errors

[JohnR34231]

A week after Low APR U shot itself in the foot by trying too hard to pass, when the running game was going well, it's a little hard to be too disappointed with a running game that did reasonably well.  For most of the game, we had a pretty balanced attack.

I do agree with you that Oregon was having real trouble covering Rector all game. And maybe if we throw a bit more, a bit earlier, that the lanes would have been a touch more open.  But really, the offense netted us 500-plus yards, so overall, it did its job.  The problem was the mistakes.... Some very untimely penalties, a failure to punch it in from first and goal at the 9 after the interception, and of course, the fumbled snaps.  A cleaner game by the offense wins.

On the other hand, give the Oregon offense some credit.  For three quarters of the game, they had our defense looking completely overmatched.  We did adjust successfully, stopping them in the fourth quarter when we needed stops, but it was too little, too late.

BC

Yeah, I had a feeling that Oregon was going to put a lot of points on the board, and if our offense wasn't sharp we stood a good chance of losing. Unfortunately, it wasn't and we did.

[JohnR34231]

A week after Low APR U shot itself in the foot by trying too hard to pass, when the running game was going well, it's a little hard to be too disappointed with a running game that did reasonably well.  For most of the game, we had a pretty balanced attack.

I do agree with you that Oregon was having real trouble covering Rector all game. And maybe if we throw a bit more, a bit earlier, that the lanes would have been a touch more open.  But really, the offense netted us 500-plus yards, so overall, it did its job.  The problem was the mistakes.... Some very untimely penalties, a failure to punch it in from first and goal at the 9 after the interception, and of course, the fumbled snaps.  A cleaner game by the offense wins.

On the other hand, give the Oregon offense some credit.  For three quarters of the game, they had our defense looking completely overmatched.  We did adjust successfully, stopping them in the fourth quarter when we needed stops, but it was too little, too late.

BC

Yeah, I had a feeling that Oregon was going to put a lot of points on the board, and if our offense wasn't sharp we stood a good chance of losing. Unfortunately, it wasn't and we did.

[donkey687]

We only punted once and never turned it over on downs. Our gameplan was fine. Moving the ball was not a problem.

[donkey687]

We only punted once and never turned it over on downs. Our gameplan was fine. Moving the ball was not a problem.

[OutsiderFan]

We only punted once and never turned it over on downs. Our gameplan was fine. Moving the ball was not a problem.

No, moving the ball wasn't a problem.  32 first downs and 12-17 3rd down conversions.  But you should score more than 36 points when you put up 500 yards with those numbers, and points come in the passing game in general. 

[OutsiderFan]

We only punted once and never turned it over on downs. Our gameplan was fine. Moving the ball was not a problem.

No, moving the ball wasn't a problem.  32 first downs and 12-17 3rd down conversions.  But you should score more than 36 points when you put up 500 yards with those numbers, and points come in the passing game in general. 

[stupac2]

[quote author=donkey687 link=topic=13637.msg141785#msg141785 date=1447598038]
We only punted once and never turned it over on downs. Our gameplan was fine. Moving the ball was not a problem.

No, moving the ball wasn't a problem.  32 first downs and 12-17 3rd down conversions.  But you should score more than 36 points when you put up 500 yards with those numbers, and points come in the passing game in general.
[/quote]

Yeah, I was a little disappointed that when we were in long goal-to-go situations we went run-run-pass every time (or so it seemed). That's fine from <5 yards or so, but from 9 it's a recipe for kicking a FG. Which we did. Twice. Oh well.

[stupac2]

[quote author=donkey687 link=topic=13637.msg141785#msg141785 date=1447598038]
We only punted once and never turned it over on downs. Our gameplan was fine. Moving the ball was not a problem.

No, moving the ball wasn't a problem.  32 first downs and 12-17 3rd down conversions.  But you should score more than 36 points when you put up 500 yards with those numbers, and points come in the passing game in general.
[/quote]

Yeah, I was a little disappointed that when we were in long goal-to-go situations we went run-run-pass every time (or so it seemed). That's fine from <5 yards or so, but from 9 it's a recipe for kicking a FG. Which we did. Twice. Oh well.

[BobK]

32 first downs and 500 yards with 36 points and we lose and it's the game plan? 
Cal just passed for 450 yards and 6 TDs I'd About our DBs and LBers

[BobK]

32 first downs and 500 yards with 36 points and we lose and it's the game plan? 
Cal just passed for 450 yards and 6 TDs I'd About our DBs and LBers

[washingtonismoney]

I think the offense wasn't quite optimized, for sure. So I get it. (I'm still wondering where the 3 TE sets went, myself.)

Still, the most egregious unit was the defense. And I don't think its troubles were scheme, I think they just have little talent.

[washingtonismoney]

I think the offense wasn't quite optimized, for sure. So I get it. (I'm still wondering where the 3 TE sets went, myself.)

Still, the most egregious unit was the defense. And I don't think its troubles were scheme, I think they just have little talent.

[StanfordMatt]

Still, the most egregious unit was the defense. And I don't think its troubles were scheme, I think they just have little talent.

Change talent to experience and I'm with you.

[StanfordMatt]

Still, the most egregious unit was the defense. And I don't think its troubles were scheme, I think they just have little talent.

Change talent to experience and I'm with you.

[CowboyIndian]

Wait a minute. The D didn't lose this game. If you watched or read about Oregon's game with Kal, you knew they were going to score. I figured 30+.

We beat them by two TDs if:

- we score TDs instead of FGs
- we don't fumble two snaps (two freaking snaps!)

We beat them, period, if:

- Ukropina makes that, what, 43-yarder?
- Kevin Anderson doesn't look over his shoulder every 10 yards with that interception return.
- Casey Tucker makes a block on the two-point conversion....and also doesn't have two crucial holding penalties.

[CowboyIndian]

Wait a minute. The D didn't lose this game. If you watched or read about Oregon's game with Kal, you knew they were going to score. I figured 30+.

We beat them by two TDs if:

- we score TDs instead of FGs
- we don't fumble two snaps (two freaking snaps!)

We beat them, period, if:

- Ukropina makes that, what, 43-yarder?
- Kevin Anderson doesn't look over his shoulder every 10 yards with that interception return.
- Casey Tucker makes a block on the two-point conversion....and also doesn't have two crucial holding penalties.

[terry]

No, moving the ball wasn't a problem.  32 first downs and 12-17 3rd down conversions.  But you should score more than 36 points when you put up 500 yards with those numbers

That's what happens when you have three turnovers and a missed FG -- you don't score as many points as you should.

[terry]

No, moving the ball wasn't a problem.  32 first downs and 12-17 3rd down conversions.  But you should score more than 36 points when you put up 500 yards with those numbers

That's what happens when you have three turnovers and a missed FG -- you don't score as many points as you should.

[French Rage]

Hard to pin on any group in particular.  Everyone had something they could have done a little better.

The defense gave up too many big plays, and that is the last thing you can do against Oregon.  On the other hand, the defense got tough in the 4th and gave the O enough chances to win or tie.

The offense got 500 yards and scored 36, which any other season we would be happy to take.  But those 2 fumbles, and not turning FGs into TDs, were the difference.

But hey, if we had lost to Wazzou, which was very close to happening, we'd be praying for a way to play into the CCG.  And remember how much of a dream it seemed midway through the 2012 season.  Or even after the USC loss in 2013.  So here we are, with a chance to pummel Cal and play into the CCG, against a Pac12 South team we can definitely play against, and get into the grand-daddy of them all.

We keep complaining about having the O we need but not the D one year, and the D we need but no the O the other.  Other teams have that problem too.  Just gotta keep playing it and it will sync up.  People keep talking about being on our way down, but this year and the upcoming recruiting classes show that isn't happening yet.  So just keep playing them until both sides sync up.  I'm excited for the seasons to come!

[French Rage]

Hard to pin on any group in particular.  Everyone had something they could have done a little better.

The defense gave up too many big plays, and that is the last thing you can do against Oregon.  On the other hand, the defense got tough in the 4th and gave the O enough chances to win or tie.

The offense got 500 yards and scored 36, which any other season we would be happy to take.  But those 2 fumbles, and not turning FGs into TDs, were the difference.

But hey, if we had lost to Wazzou, which was very close to happening, we'd be praying for a way to play into the CCG.  And remember how much of a dream it seemed midway through the 2012 season.  Or even after the USC loss in 2013.  So here we are, with a chance to pummel Cal and play into the CCG, against a Pac12 South team we can definitely play against, and get into the grand-daddy of them all.

We keep complaining about having the O we need but not the D one year, and the D we need but no the O the other.  Other teams have that problem too.  Just gotta keep playing it and it will sync up.  People keep talking about being on our way down, but this year and the upcoming recruiting classes show that isn't happening yet.  So just keep playing them until both sides sync up.  I'm excited for the seasons to come!