1. Perspective

Coming off the heartbreaker to Notre Dame, and considering the upheaval in the Pac-12, Stanford was facing a lot of uncertainty. Heck, Connor Halliday had just set the all-time NCAA record! But Stanford played solid football against an inferior opponent, and the ship is back on course.

Stanford has played 66 consecutive games without suffering back-to-back losses. While Stanford is off to a tough start in 2014, the bounce-back wins remind us how lucky we are as fans—our suffering is quickly supplanted by the joys of victory. Stanford has won the next game following each of its 12 losses in that time span. Is this fact a testament to the heart and character of the team, or is it just an expected statistical outcome of a winning team?

Stanford is 54-12 in its past 66 games. 54/66 reduces to 9 wins per 11 games, or a 82% win percentage. How likely is it that Stanford won all 12 games following a loss?

(9/11)¹² = .09 or 9%. (The sample might seem skewed if Stanford losses to good teams and then has easier teams scheduled for the subsequent games, but those 12 wins include wins over Arizona, UCLA, USC, and Notre Dame.)

Thus, it is fairly safe to conclude that Stanford relies on focus and motivation rather than statistics to win its next game after a loss. For a program to have sustained success, that kind of heart and character goes a long way.

2. Offense and Play-Calling

After the game, Shaw said, “We looked like us and we felt like us.” Presumably he was referring mostly to execution, but I think the statement applies more to play-calling. Let’s look at a few important adjustments that were made that I think will lead to a much more productive offense.

• Simplify the Running Back Situation. Barry Sanders took most of the carries on the first drive and looked great. Remound Wright took most of the drives after that. Sanders had 9.7 yds/carry and Wright had 7.0 yds/carry. Great numbers. Kelsey Young, on the other hand, took one handoff for three yards and one sweep on a successful play that was called back by a penalty. I think that Shaw has narrowed our running back situation to Sanders and Wright, which has seemed like the correct thing to do for a while now. Kelsey Young is better on sweeps and reverses in the open field, but he doesn’t have the same running back instincts as Sanders or Wright. From now on, I expect to see a two-man show, and that simplification should help the offense stay in a better flow.

• Use More Deception. Twice in the first half, Stanford used Ty Montgomery in the backfield as a decoy. Dave Fleming, who called a good game with Danny Kanell, noted from the booth, “That was another play when Ty Montgomery, the wide receiver, was in the backfield as a running back. That’s two plays—neither time he has gotten the ball. I think some were thinking maybe Stanford has gotten predictable. They have not been predictable on offense tonight.” Montgomery as a decoy has a lot of potential for the rest of this year. Also, Shaw had Hogan use play-action out of the Jumbo package multiple times, including a roll-out TD throw to tight end Taboada. As sick and tired as Stanford fans have gotten watching us run up the middle for one yard out of the Jumbo package, it sure does set up nicely for some play-action.

• More Christian McCaffrey. McCaffrey was deliberately targeted many more times this game. He has shown an ability to make plays, and he runs downfield with a purpose. Shaw should continue to call his number more often.

• Target the Tight-Ends. Tight-ends had three TD catches. In the 1^st quarter, Hogan hit Cotton on a beautiful play that included multiple tight ends downfield, confusing the safety. It was the type of play we saw Luck and Ertz connect on so many times a few years ago. And it was deceptive. It was on play-action out of the Jumbo formation. To me, this is the quintessential Stanford offensive play. Where has it been all season? With four great receiving tight ends, we should be using this play more. It works.

• Go For It on 4^th Down. In the 2^nd half, on 4^th and 6 from WSU’s 30, Stanford went for it. I like the call. It should have worked, since Rector was tackled before the ball reached him, but there was no pass interference call. The silver lining of more missed Williamson field goals is that Shaw will be more willing to go for it on 4th down. Still, technically, the play didn’t work. Stanford is one of three teams that has not converted a 4^th down attempt yet this year. (Strangely, Florida St is one of the other two teams—0/1 on the year.) But I’m hoping Shaw comes around to going for it more on 4^th down. Against ASU last year, Shaw ran the ball on 4^th and Goal from the 1 in the 2^nd quarter. Expect Stanford to pound the ground on 4^th and short against ASU.

If we can continue to do more of the above, and keep Hogan rolling out and throwing from play-action situations, our offense will be more successful.

3. Defense

Stanford still maintains the #1 scoring defense in the country. It has yet to give up more than 17 points. In the past 29 games, no opponent has scored 30 or more points—the longest such streak in the country.

The defense pressured Halliday and made tackles when necessary. Zach Hoffpauir finished with a game-high 15 tackles. Beautiful stuff from one of the best defenses in the country.

4. Around the Pac-12

The match-ups theory of tailgate monarch Danny B. and brewflip classmaster Karl L.S. is holding true. Oregon beat UCLA for the 6^th consecutive time. UW beat Cal for the 6^th straight time. USC beat Arizona for the 2^nd straight time. Stanford beat WSU for the 7th consecutive time.

Washington vs Oregon will get a bit of hype and intrigue this weekend, but it shouldn’t. Oregon has won 10 in a row against UW—all by at least 17 points.

Watch out for Cal against UCLA. Cal has won its last seven home games against UCLA.  

5. Up Next: Arizona State (4-1)

Staying with the matchups theory, let’s look at recent battles. Stanford beat Arizona State twice last year. Both games were blowouts. Stanford ran the ball for well over 200 yards in both games. How has ASU’s defense changed since then? It has gotten worse! It lost 9 starters on defense. This year, it is 103^rd in rushing defense, allowing 203 yards/game. Last year it was 26^th in the country in rushing defense. Of course, Stanford isn’t bringing the same rushing attack from last year either, but the fall-off hasn’t been as dramatic. If Stanford can run the ball and control the line of scrimmage, it should be able to win. Keeping Jaelen Strong to less than 150 yards receiving might be a good idea as well.

 6. The Playoff Picture

After LSU’s win against Florida, the SEC West is now 26 – 0 when not playing itself. The SEC West’s remaining nonconference games are Samford, Western Carolina, Presbyterian, Louisiana-Monroe, Tennessee-Martin, and UAB. (A load of crap, but that’s a dump for another time.) So there’s six more wins. Surely though the SEC West will lose to an SEC East team later this year. If the only loss is Arkansas losing to Georgia, for example, then the SEC West will be sending two teams to the playoff. The only argument against the SEC West’s supreme dominance is that they eat more cupcakes than other conferences. This is clearly true, but the SEC West also owns better wins than other conferences. It owns wins versus: #17 KSU and #26 Wisconsin (Sagarin rankings). It doesn’t sound like much, but it is better than other conferences. The entire Pac-12 only has one nonconference win over the top-40: Oregon over Michigan State.

The SEC West plays 75% of its conference games against its division, compared to only 55% for the Pac-12 North. In a year when the SEC West is deeper than the thoughts of Jack Handy, the set-up of the conference schedule means that these seven teams have some of the hardest schedules in the country. Normally, Mississippi State should be punished for scheduling Southern Miss, UAB, South Alabama, and Tennesee-Martin. It also plays the lump of sand that is Vanderbilt. So it has five guaranteed wins. No Pac-12 team has a schedule with 5 guaranteed wins. But, the seven other games on MSU’s schedule are brutal! So, this year, the soft serve of SEC scheduling is much less egregious. The SEC West will eat its own, just like the Pac-12 is doing. When the feast ends, though, there will likely be two SEC West teams still sitting at the Playoff table.

7. Holy Molasses: Mississippi State Is For Real!

A few weeks ago, I wrote that Mississippi State would lose its next three games and once again disappear from the paragraph of the AP Poll. Instead, the Bulldogs did something that has been done only one other time in the past 55 years: win three consecutive games against top-10 teams. Stunning. This is an unfathomable turnaround. In my lifetime, probably no fan base has experienced the kind of long-awaited euphoria that has recently engulfed the state of Mississippi. How are they possibly getting any work done down there this week? They should just declare a continuous statewide holiday until Ole Miss or MSU lose.

8. Overrated Teams of the Week

#8 Michigan State Spartans (5-1).

#13 Ohio State Buckeyes (4-1).

#19 Nebraska Cornhuskers (5-1).

Everyone knows the Big Ten has already blown its chance to send a team to the Playoff. But then why are its teams still over-ranked in the polls? The Big Ten has zero nonconference wins against the top-40 this year. The Big Ten’s best win is Penn State (4-2) over UCF (3-2). Holy broccoli stalks of girthless depravity! Deplorable! Ohio State has lost to every top-20 team it has played for the past three years. Nebraska… uh… I’m getting tired of listing reasons why Nebraska is mediocre. Michigan State looks pretty good, but not better than Oregon! If Oregon and Arizona lost and needed to move down, then Michigan State needs to move down with them! (Though Michigan State should still be ahead of Stanford because of the Rose Bowl.)

How will justice prevail such that these teams move down in the rankings? Unfortunately, the Big Ten is done with nonconference games. We’ll have to hope that Michigan State, Ohio State, and Nebraska lose to the little sisters of the poor.