You See Davis, I See Disaster

Much has been made on the west coast of USC's continued dominance, UCLA's not-so-surprizing win over Oklahoma, and Cal's continued push up the rankings, but there was one score from Saturday that stood out above all others:

UC Davis 20, Stanford 17

It isn't easy being a Stanford football fan. Every once in a while a few key recruits choose the road less travelled and come to Palo Alto, embracing the dual challenge presented by Stanford's curriculum and Pac-10 schedule, but there usually aren't enough of these brave souls. There are exceptional years when the stars align (1999, for example) and a strong Stanford team combined with a weak conference makes for success, but this doesn't happen often. Mediocrity is more typical.

I don't ask much of the Mighty Card. I'd like for them to qualify for a bowl game more often than not, and I want them to beat Cal, but I don't pretend that this school will ever be a perennial pigskin power. Here's what I would like. I'd like to see them beat all of the Division II schools on their schedule. Maybe next year.

Without question, this is the worst loss in the program's history. Stanford doesn't have the tradition of Michigan or Notre Dame, but we're still talking about a Pac-10 team that has graduated players such as Jim Plunkett, John Elway, and James Lofton. Sure, UC Davis has won some championships, but those were Division II championships. Unbelievable.

Just to put this loss into perspective, here's an excerpt ESPN.com's game recap:

The Aggies played their first game against a Division I-A team in eight years and beat a I-A team for the first time since 1986 against Pacific. It was the first time in 65 years they had faced a team that currently is in the Pac-10 and they lost to Stanford the only previous time they played 59-0 in 1932 when Pop Warner was Stanford's coach.

And apparently the game wasn't as close as the score would indicate. A few key stats:

First downs: 21-11
Passing yards: 251-118
Rushing yards: 157-62
Total yards: 408-180!!

Quarterback Trent Edwards went down early, pushing T.C. Ostrander into the game, but that cannot explain what happened. Ostrander was a blue-chip recruit who played well at times last season, so I would expect more from him. The bottom line, though, is that a Stanford team should be able to beat a Division II team even with a member of the debate team at quarterback. Stanford University will never stand amongst those few schools who consistently challenge for national championships, but Coach Walt Harris and his staff certainly must expect more than this. I know that I do. This loss was an absolute embarrassment.

For what it's worth, my reaction is based completely on a perusal of the stats and game report. For a more thorough first-hand account and accompanying analysis that arrives at the same conclusion presented here, jump over to Andrew Aymeloglu's site. Good stuff there.

Comments

[Hillboy]

Mr. Cowboy, you should do a little more homework. Although few college football fans thought the Aggies had a chance in this one, you just need to look back to a scrimmage two years ago. The Ags showed up and hustled; the Cardinal whined about it being "practice". UC Davis is a perennial winner: 35 straight winning seasons. UC Davis QBs continue to win championships: CFL, AFL, NFL Europe. As Dufresne (LA Times) described the current QB Jon Grant as the second coming of Joe Montana, there are a few former coaches and players out there that knew the possibilities; try Hawkins (Boise State) and Bellotti (Oregon), for example. As for Harris, where did he play and coach? UOP. Who was the last DI team UC Davis beat? UOP. He knew the possibilities too.

It may have looked easy for the Stanford boys on paper, but the Aggies didn't even play their best game (3 missed FGs, 1 missed PAT).

[Hank]

I think I did do my homework, and I think the post was fair. I was highly critical of Stanford's performance, but I think it's disingenous not to admit that this was a game that Stanford should've won. Afterall, that's the reason this is a story. The underdogs not only won, they dominated.