1. Perspective

Stanford picked up right where it left off against Northwestern: execution problems (drops, bad passes) and penalties. The penalties really hindered Stanford’s ability to put points on the board early—costing us first downs and a big punt return. As the first half went on, Stanford fans were feeling very discouraged. In almost 90 minutes of football this season, we had scored no touchdowns. I found myself daydreaming about other things… champagne with my wife, a bubble bath, a platter of assorted dessert tarts. Shaw was coloring between the lines in similar shades of dullness. But just when I was about to leave at halftime for Whole Foods to buy eucalyptus ginger bath salts, the Stanford defense recovered its first fumble of the season. Soon after, with one flick of the flea, the offense flamed to life. It was for the best, I suppose. Technically speaking, I don’t have a wife or a bathtub.

2. Coaching & Play-calling

I was extremely critical of Shaw’s play-calling against Northwestern. Not surprisingly, I felt mostly pleased with Shaw’s play-calling as I was walking out of Stanford Stadium late Saturday night. It felt like there was more diversity to the offense, but was there really? Was Shaw correct that the problems against Northwestern were all about execution? Perhaps I was just biased by the results? I decided to watch both games again so I could quantitatively compare play-calling. For both games, I noted any plays that were different than your generic run or pass plays. Here’s the breakdown of plays I deemed more dynamic than your standard plays.

The data is clear. The play-calling was definitely more geared towards dynamic plays against UCF. Shaw had a good game against UCF! When McCaffrey runs and basic passes weren’t working, Shaw mixed it up. I just wish Shaw would admit that he—as well as the players—had a bad game against Northwestern. I don’t mind a coach who has a bad game occasionally. I just can’t stand the insecurity disguised as denial and the lack of self-awareness.

As long as Shaw continues to mix up the play-calling, I really only have one outstanding issue with his game management: 4^th down strategy. Clearly, I am not alone. There was a chorus of boos echoing throughout the stadium when Shaw punted from UCF’s 33 yard-line in the 1^st quarter. Exposing his own lack of coherent strategy for these situations, Shaw let Ukropina try a kick from two yards further away later in the 2^nd quarter. Ukropina made the 52-yard field goal with plenty of room to spare. If it is 4^th and short from past midfield, we should go for it. If it is 4^th and long and we are in inside the 40, we should try a field goal. Punting has been mathematically proven to be a poor strategy, and Shaw is still in the dark on this one. Though he shows signs of seeing the light occasionally. He did go for it on 4^th and 1 from the 44 in the 2^nd quarter. He also went for it on 4^th and 3 from the UCF 4 yard-line in the 4^th quarter. Both were good calls. In the 4^th, Stanford was up 17-0—a field goal still keeps it a three score game. I doubt that Shaw was thinking numerically, but either way, I’m happy to see any signs of aggressive offensive strategy.

3. Offense

Bryce Love has arrived! Last week I wrote that I wasn’t sure what was going to be new this year. I now have an answer to that question. Bryce Love has both ankle-breaking moves and track star speed.

I was wrong about Francis Owusu. I thought he was going to have a breakout year. Instead, he has looked slow and he dropped a pass against Northwestern. Shaw seems to realize this and is developing other options like Love and Irwin.

I didn’t realize this until after the game when I saw the box score: McCaffrey was really shut down in the rushing game. He had 20 carries for 58 yards. Not a great sign for him and the offensive line. McCaffrey seems like he is going to be more effective catching passes out of the slot. He has great hands just like his father. I’d like to see him line up there more and have Remound Wright take some of the carries in the backfield.

We finally got to see Keller Chryst, who completed a 20 yard pass in the 4^th quarter and now owns a 268 passer rating. I’d like to see him more—sooner rather than later.

4. Defense

I don’t remember watching an entire game when I never once registered a name, number, or skill of a single player on the opposing team. I didn’t even notice that UCF had played three different quarterbacks. The defense was so dominant that there was almost no point trying to discern what UCF was trying to do on offense. Nothing worked.

Shout out goes true freshman Quenton Meeks (#24) who made one of the best defensive plays in recent memory. UCF went for a 4^th and 9 conversion in the 1^st quarter, and Meeks stepped in front of the tight end to break up the pass. Stanford defensive backs have always been solid, but rarely do we see them step in front of a receiver. Meeks and the rest of the secondary are playing well so far this year.

5. Officiating

UCF had two penalties for 19 yards. Stanford was penalized 12 times for 137 yards. I’ve never seen such a lopsided game. Most of the penalties were self-inflicted, but a 12 men in the huddle penalty was phantom, and the officials erroneously waived off a UCF holding flag on an Irwin deep route. The fact that Stanford still dominated despite the penalty discrepancy shows how much more talented it was.

6. Up Next: USC (2-0)

Every USC game for the past 5 years has been epic. I’m hoping for more of the same. If the Stanford secondary can limit big plays, it should be a close game. USC has two blowouts, but Idaho is horrible and Arkansas State gained over 400 yards—4 turnovers helped turn that game one-sided. So we really don’t know too much about USC yet. And we still don’t know what Stanford can do. We’ll know a lot more after this Saturday’s game.