BY Art Thiel 12:49AM 10/06/2013

Thiel: Price brilliant, but Huskies shy of upset

Special teams failures and a dubious replay call on the Huskies’ final play led to a 31-28 defeat Saturday night against Stanford, thwarting a splendid game from QB Keith Price.

Under intense pressure all night, Keith Price still managed to throw for 350 yards. / Drew McKenzie, Sportspress Northwest

Keith Price couldn’t have done more if he had been born on Krypton. Except for maybe growing to eight feet tall.

The Huskies quarterback took a pounding for four quarters, but a pass batted at the line of scrimmage into a red-zone interception on the third-to-last Washington possession was the opportunity missed, and Stanford survived 31-28 in a spectacular, nationally televised  match of Pac-12 Conference unbeatens Saturday night in Palo Alto.

After never being behind through a 4-0 seasonal start, Washington never led against the fifth-ranked Cardinal (5-0), but looked as if they might grab the lead the only time it counted.  Getting the ball back with 1:51 left, Price was down to fourth-and-10 desperation at midfield. He scrambled wildly before hitting WR Kevin Smith on a 16-yard completion at the Stanford 33 for an apparent first down with 1:31 remaining.

But a replay review claimed that the ball slipped from the grasp of a diving Smith. The ball went over to the Cardinal, which closed out a perilous triumph that avenged a 17-13 loss a year ago in Seattle, Stanford’s only conference loss in a 12-2 season.

Price was 33 for 48 for 350 yards and two touchdowns, but the one pick, off a splendid leaping block by all-conference linebacker Trent Murphy that blooped the ball into the arms of A.J. Tarpley, was the late-game difference-maker.

But after the Huskies defense, which had numerous big-play denials of the Cardinal offense, forced a three-and-out, the Huskies took over at their own 21 and screamed downfield in six plays over 90 seconds, the last yard on a pass in the flat to Jaydon Mickens (his game high ninth of the game). That TD cut the Stanford lead to 31-28.

The Huskies eschewed an onside-kick attempt and counted on their defense, which delivered a 3-and-out that forced Stanford to punt and set up the final drive that was decided in the replay booth.

Coach Steve Sarkisian was not pleased with how the end went down.

“It was ruled a catch, and to overturn a catch you have to have conclusive evidence,” he told KJR radio. “If it takes three minutes (to deliver a verdict), I’m not sure there’s conclusive evidence. If it was the other way, where it was ruled a no-catch and then reversed, I could live with it. But to say it was complete (on the field) and then take three minutes, I have a hard time swallowing that one.

“To have two teams play like this on national TV, and have it decided by some man in a glass box in a suite . . . it’s like a great movie with a bad ending.”

Equally annoying for Sarkisian was Stanford’s late-game tactic of faking injuries to slow down Washington’s uptempo offense. At least two players went down in theatrical agony and staggered off, only to return in a couple of plays.

“Their defensive-line coach (former UW assistant Randy Hart) was telling them to sit down,” Sarkisian said. ” I guess that’s how we play here at Stanford, so we’ll have to prepare for that next time. At some point, we’ll get repaid for it. That never serves a purpose for us, and we’ll never do that.”

The unpersuasive replay and the dubious Cardinal ethics diminished an otherwise dramatic game in which the Huskies fell behind 10-0 and 31-21, but kept delivering blows nearly as fast as Stanford.

Washington outgained Stanford 489 yards to 284, and limited Cardinal QB Kevin Hogan to 100 yards passing. But the game was lost with special teams, normally a big point of pride for Sarkisian. And even though Huskies fans will lament the Smith reversal, it was the game’s first play that decided the outcome.

Ty Montgomery, clocked in 4.42 seconds in the 40-yard dash, demonstrated that he was the weapon of the game when he returned the opening kickoff 99 yards for a 7-0 Stanford lead. In the second half, he had another 68-yard kickoff return. And in his regular job as wide receiver, he caught a 39-touchdown pass from Hogan — the best ball he threw in the game — just before halftime for a 17-7 lead.

The TD drive was set up by another special teams miscue. After Bishop Sankey — the nation’s leading rusher had 125 yards and two TDs on 27 carries —  scored on a seven-yard run to cut UW’s deficit to 10-7, Sarkisian wanted to avoid kicking to Montgomery. But the “popover” kickoff was poorly executed and Stanford took over at its own 39 with about three minutes left in the half. The short field make it easier for the Cardinal.

For the game, Stanford began its drives on average at the 42, Washington at the 23.

The Huskies made up for the misplay by coming out of the second-half gate with a booming drive of 79 yards that required only four plays and 59 seconds. The last 29 came after a long scramble by Price when he found Smith wide open on a crossing pattern at the eight-yard line and scored easily.

Stanford counterpunched, going 67 yards in 10 plays, with Hogan, lined up in the “elephant” package of seven big linemen and a full-house backfield, went in from four yards untouched.

Sankey’s 15-yard TD run cut Washington’s deficit to 24-21, but Montgomery took the kickoff 68 yards to set up Stanford at the Washington 19, from where it scored in three plays.

Besides the disappointing end, Sarkisian was happy with how hard and well his team played.

“The heart our kids displayed tonight, I couldn’t be more proud of them as a coach,” he said. “Our teams in the past might have folded in the extreme situations we found ourselves in tonight. These guys didn’t. But you can play in a fantasy world of what-ifs.”

Price received special mention.

“What an absolute stud,” he said. “That’s what we were hoping for. We knew their plan was to get after him and hurt him. To deliver the ball the way he did under real duress, I’m really proud of him.”

Said Cardinal coach David Shaw of Price: “I can’t say enough about their quarterback. He played great.”


  • jafabian

    The defense made some big plays but also gave up some. The Cardinal scoring before halftime hurt. And the offensive line was called for too many penalties. But the Dawgs were in this game the entire way when they weren’t favored. A good game overall but was there for the taking.

    • TheCardinalRules

      A rare classy response from a Husky fan. Wish more of your fan base – and your HC – could be more like you.

      • Jay

        Lets clarify here though… The guys going down did not prevent a TD. So even if that was their plan, they could not stop the UW offense. It should be investigated though. A simple rule to both protect players from hurting themseves further and to prevent such a thing from happening is to simply make a rule to keep the player out for the continuation of the drive if they go down hurt. Doubt Skov would have went down then… Prove he didn’t go down on purpose before assuming something that happens a lot to fast paced teams doesn’t happen. Good luck to the Furd the rest of the season bu tthe Huskies beat themselves, not Stanford.

        • j

          If Stanford was faking injuries, why did those injuries occur on a drive during which the team was up by 10 with 10 min left in the game and not on one of the last two drives of the game, when UW was playing even more of a hurry up offense?

          • Thatsafact jack

            Seems to me like Sarkisian is just bitter about a loss. Of course you would be able to accept it if the call was a drop and then got reveresed, because that would benefit your team. You can complain about this guy in the glass box, but if your player caught the ball cleanly we wouldn’t be having this convo. Instead you tried to run up to the ball and snap it before refs have time to review, so if anyone was trying to cheat the system it was the huskies. Not to mention andother play on the sideline that upon further review would’ve been overturned was called complete and thanks to the hurry up the refs never reviewed and UW scored a TD plays later. Hypocrite that Sarkisian, take the loss and get ready for your Oregon beating.

          • Mirek

            If you’re talking about the Kasen Williams play where his elbow touched in bounds before anything…. you should re check the video.

        • Rachel Blakeman

          How about prove he did go down on purpose. His knee was clearly hyperextended in the play just before he went to ground.

  • Football Fan

    Haha, just goes to prove coach sark belongs at USC, in lieu of accepting responsibility for being an indisciplined team who committs penalty after penalty and not coaching his players to cover kicks he Lays BLAME on a reversed call and states that the Stanfird a Coaches told their players to lay down! Sounds like he just improving his resume to get the job at USC. He will fit perfectly with bunch of clowns!

    • Thatsafact jack

      Couldn’t have said that better myself. I thought Sark would have more self respect, but turns out he’s more like Pete “What’s your Deal” Carroll and “sorry excuse for a coach” Kiffin than I thought. His defensive coordinator is good though.

  • Buggy White

    The ball bounced on the grass when Kevin Smith hit the ground, and he lost control of it for a fraction of a second, so it was an incomplete pass. Special teams were the problem, not a last-minute desperation heave.

    • acLive

      So you must have been on the sidelines then because the video doesn’t show that. The video can be reasonably interpreted either way which means the ruling on the field should stand, even half the people looking at it think it’s wrong.

  • m raleigh

    Nice job, Art. Buying in to Sark’s whining. Seattle is a lovely city to visit but it’s propensity to whine about everything(Sonics leaving, the Super Bowl victory that the officials took away etc etc) makes it impossible to spend more than a weekend there. Hell you guys even whined when A Rod left. Wonder what the excuses will be next week after you all get boat raced by the Ducks

  • TheCardinalRules

    Look at and then tell me there wasn’t indisputable evidence.

    As for the ridiculous accusation, Sark oughta know since he hired the conference’s resident expert on the subject. I know enough to know that if Coach Hart did that, Shaw would fire him before the NCAA even knew it happened.

    Sark showing he will fit in just fine at U$C.

    • Play Classy, Bears

      Karma for Toshgate. F Sarkisian and his dirty program.

      • acLive

        Speaking of sour grapes…

    • acLive

      Woa, you’re right. Kevin Smith IS A GHOST!?! Conclusive evidence FOUND! Everyone knows ghosts can’t catch footballs.

    • Harry Mudd

      Ummm… there isn’t indisputable evidence. There-that was easy. This picture shows nothing. Is the ball moving? Is it secured within the arms? in any event he has possession right now and his knees are down. the play is at this point over and the ball is not touching the ground.

      I saw this on the broadcast, and hew caught the ball. that was the ruling on the field and there is NO evidence in the replay which credibly disputes that. It should have been 1st down Huskies. Would they have won? Who knows but it should NOT have ended this way.

  • Annoyed

    I don’t think I’ve ever read a more biased sports article. You call yourself a journalist? Every guy on both sides gave it their all. And if you were to actually watch the slow motion replays, you would see that the pass you’re referring to was incomplete, and there were no faked injuries. No guy ever wants to leave the field, it’s what they live for. In the end, it was a great game. It was football. Grow up some.

    • Play Classy, Bears

      Apparently “Equally annoying for Sarkisian was Stanford’s late-game tactic of faking injuries to slow down Washington’s uptempo offense. ” passes for Journalism. Because he is able to PROVE that and thus should use language to reflect that. I’ve read better articles on SB Nation.

  • Rachel Blakeman

    “Equally annoying for Sarkisian was Stanford’s late-game tactic of faking injuries to slow down Washington’s uptempo offense. At least two players went down in theatrical agony and staggered off, only to return in a couple of plays.”

    Go back and take a look of the video of the plays before those players were down. Those were not faked injuries. Gardner fell onto the outside of his shoulder. Have seen this many times resulting in AC or SC joint injuries, the extent of which would determine if an athlete was able to return to the game.

    Skov had a teammate roll/fall into him, resulting in a knee hyperextension. Classic mechanism of injury for ACL/PCL, again, the extent of which (mild, moderate, or severe) would determine if he was able to return straight away. With Skov’s ACL/MCL history, add scary on top of knee hyperextensions hurt a lot, even if a ligament is not torn.

    As for the overturned reception, the replay at the stadium was from a front view, and several of us were surprised when the reception was overruled. However, having now seen the camera angle from behind, the ball clearly goes through the receiver’s arms and he traps it on the ground.

    Perhaps Sarkisian needs to focus more in his team’s inability to produce a score after a 16 play drive, as well as on the penalty yardage they gave up.

    • Play Classy, Bears

      You know your team’s coach is a douche when a non-partisan fan agrees and is impressed by a fan from his rival.

      Gotta say, the douchier (word?) that the rest of the Pac-12 gets the more I like I Stanfurd. ::Shudder:: what has CFB come to??

    • acLive

      You’re mistaken. And nice explanation of the injuries. Good thing they used the 5 seconds it took UW to run the next play to evaluate/diagnose/clear them on the sidelines and get them back into action. Must be those wicked smart trainers they got down at Superiority University.

      • Rachel Blakeman

        Both times, the Athletic Trainers assessed the injuries on the field.
        Per NCAA rules: “An injured player must also miss a play before he’s allowed to take part in the game again.”
        This would explain why both athletes were back in so quickly. It’s really not that difficult to complete an on-field injury assessment — can take less than a minute if the athlete is able to tell you what happened, or if the AT saw what happened. Takes a little longer if you need to do any special tests, as they did with Skov. Wouldn’t expect anyone who doesn’t work in the profession or who is an athlete and has experienced it to know that.

  • BW617

    I haven’t seen any press on Price’s right thumb – taped sometime during the Stanford game. Plus – Keith took some shots. One late hit – that was flagged, was clearly spearing – led with the helmut. Still – Cardinal LB didn’t get thrown out.

    Tough to blame officials when Huskie’s special teams let those two gaffers through. But somewhere, somehow – these officials in the PAC-12 need to get jacked up.

  • Woodcock

    Lets look ahead to Oregon.

  • Play Classy, Bears


    • Dave

      What, because your team stinks and has nothing to play for you decide to troll the sites of other Pac-12 teams who are playing meaningful football??
      Why would a real CAL Bears fan want anything but their rival (Stanford) to lose?

      • Play Classy, Bears

        Some points to address:
        1) My team stinks. Badly. But will get better one day soon, we have lots of good pieces.
        2) Your comment about “nothing to play for” reveals your bias as to what CFB is about for you which is winning the National Championship and misses much of the beauty of CFB which includes (atmosphere, emotion, sportsmanship, growth, tradition, honor). Of course many of these are threatened by trolls like you and your belief that only being ranked number 1 matters.
        3) A “real” fan loves his team and can recognize that there are teams that are better. Am I envious of Stanfurd? HELL YES. I admire that they are doing things the “right” way (See above). Am I envious of Washington? ABSOFUKINGLUTLELY not. They epitomize everything that is “wrong” with CFB these days. So I talk $#!T not to troll but to fight against that which is corrupting the sport I have loved for decades. I celebrate the win not only for Stanfurd but also for all of CFB.

        • Dave

          What a “classy” and truly pathetic response.
          Please don’t lecture Husky fans on “atmosphere, emotion, sportsmanship, growth, tradition, honor”. UW has the best atmosphere in the conference. We showed more emotion/support for our team when we were 0-12 then CAL does when they have winning seasons, and there is no “tradition” to speak of at CAL. Just ask ANYONE in college football who the top teams in terms of tradition are in the PAC-12 (#1 – USC; #2 – Washington; CAL – N/A). As for sportsmanship and honor, why don’t we just see how personal foul penalties were called against Wahsington . . . ZERO. However, even the announcers thought that Stanford should have had an ejection for spearing.
          I don’t know what to say about growth. We have grown from 0-12 five years ago to where we are today. CAL has been shrinking for the past few years.
          And your final point, which is laughable, about rooting against your bitter rival. Ask any Husky fan and they will tell you that they root against Oregon and/or WSU during conference games because of the RIVALRY, which is a huge part of the college atmosphere, something you seem to know little about.
          Any college program with real atmosphere will tell you they never root for their rival unless it benefits them, and even then it’s difficult. Ohio State does not root for Michigan. USC does not root for UCLA. LSU does not root for Alabama. Florida does not root for Georgia.
          All those programs have a few things in common, a desire to win and a great atmosphere!

          • Play Classy, Bears

            Someone is still upset:


          • j

            Wrong – 4 personal fouls in the game, 3 on UW, 1 on Stanford. Check ESPN’s play by play if you don’t believe me:

          • Dave

            Sorry, I should have been more specific.
            Ejectionable personal foul penalties:
            UW – 0; Stanford – 1
            By Classy’s logic, doesn’t that mean that Stanford has no morals??

  • lance

    First off, its hilarious and ironic that Tosh’s current employer is complaining about faking injuries. Second off, any of you Stanford fans who do not believe those injuries were faked are delusional. Take it from an expert, an Oregon fan who has seen it for years, those injuries were indeed faked.

    • Rachel Blakeman

      So Skov’s knee being hyperextended was faked? Can see that happen clearly. I think a more pertinent question is if those athletes could have left the field before being assessed, not if they faked injuries. In both cases, there was a clearly visible mechanism for injury — if you are familiar with mechanisms of injury and can recognize them.

      • lance

        So Skov hyper-extended his knee but was out only 1 play? Come on. Stop being delusional. They both faked their injuries.

        • Rachel Blakeman

          Completely possible to hyperextend a knee and be able to play again the next play. 20+ years working in sports medicine here, so I’m actually educated about sports injuries, rather than delusional as you assert. Have seen it happen many times over the years. Hyperextending a knee does not automatically mean there is ligament damage, but it still hurts like hell for a minute. That on top of Skov’s history of knee injury last year, not at all surprising he went to ground. Take a look at video of where he was injured — clear hyperextension from his teammate hitting him.

    • Laney

      The injuries were not faked. You were not on the field, not at the game (I was) and did not watch the replay of the injuries. You did not experience a collective intake of breath and concern for Skov and Garnder as they lay on the field. I know these guys and I know this team. They are a tough and virtuous.

      • lance

        Pfft. They were faked. So when Oregon comes to town how many times will Skov and Gardner fall down in agony to only miss 1 play? You know its coming. OR is faster and better at the uptempo that WA.

        • GiantsRock

          Lance, How do you know? Where you there? No you’re just a little boy with a computer crying like your whiny coach that it didn’t go your way. Grow the F up and have some actual, documented, proven facts before uttering libelous accusations.

          • lance

            Umm.. I am a Duck fan, not a Husky fan. I think its hilarious Sark is crying because his assistant coach got caught employing this same tactic verses OR when he coached at CAL. Those of you who cannot see the obviousness of the fake injuries employed by Stanford must also believe the WWF is real.

    • LostRespect4Sark

      It doesn’t take a Stanford degree to know you don’t fake injuries with your best defenders.

      • lance

        Yet that is exactly what they did. Its funny to me that you couch QB’s think you know more than a college coach. Sark called it out, because it was obvious. If you do not believe it, just wait until they play Oregon.

  • SFTrojanFaithful

    I thought that was a great game – Stanford should count their blessings that they were outplayed in 2 of 3 phases of the game. Stanford’s offense should have them worried – they are vulnerable, the D is obviously their strength. I thought the Huskies played great aside from special teams. Thought the final call was a shame. Tough to make that call when the litmus test for overturning an on the field call is “conclusive evidence.” Looking forward to seeing SC play Stanford, time to flip this relationship.

    • Rachel Blakeman

      There was a point late in the game where I commented how surprised I was that our defense had not scored. The defense has definitely been the backbone of this team. As for that overturned call, a lot of us there were surprised at the overturn after watching the replay on the stadium bigscreen, which was from a front view. Having now seen a different angle — one from behind — I can see he ball go through the receiver’s hands to where he traps it on the ground. I, however, would prefer to not have anymore situations like that!

  • SeattleTree

    I’m honestly not sure which is more disgusting: a college coach accusing the other team’s players of faking injuries (allegedly at the request of an opposing coach) or a journalist buying into such classless allegations. The only thing dubious here is your journalism.

    A great, gutty effort by Price. I’m glad Stanford doesn’t have to face him again. A tremendous effort by Sankey and the Husky defense as well. It’s too bad UW’s coach has to tarnish that with his classless, unprofessional post-game comments. Hopefully he receives an appropriate reprimand from the conference and sees fit to apologize to the Stanford coaches and players, especially Shane Skov and Ben Gardner, each of whom are warriors like Price.

    • Dave

      SeattleTree, I have to agree with you. I wouldn’t call Sark’s accusations classless, but I also don’t think they were faked.
      If you’re going to fake an injury, why use your best player (Skov) so he has to sit out a play or two. I think Sark is still miffed at the officiating!

  • kn

    Visor, no huddle offense, going for it on 4th down, shiny helmets, sideline placards, teams faking injuries to slow you down, sound familiar? Save for the whiny attitude, I’d say UW is trying to be like oregon…

  • Dave

    It’s amusing to me that Stanford (and CAL) fans are gleefully sending Sark to USC.
    Be careful what you wish for. If Sark leaves UW, we will promote Wilcox from DC to coach and Lupoi to DC.
    With those pieces in place, and Sark at USC, Stanford (and CAL) will be getting whopped regularly bu Washington, Oregon AND USC.

  • Pepe

    Art, I’ve read you for years, and this piece is yet another low point for you. At least do some minimal examination of Sark’s claims rather than buying whole hog into his whining.
    If Stanford wanted to fake injuries, would they use their best lineman and best linebacker to do it? Wouldn’t they instead use less vital players? Skov was out for multiple consecutive plays on that drive. Why would Stanford want to have their best LB out for multiple plays?
    And why would Stanford choose that particular drive to fake injuries rather than drives later in the game or drives before it? What was special about that drive that would make Stanford fake injuries and remove their beat lineman and linebacker for multiple plays?
    And the replay official got it right.
    Art, you didn’t used to be this soft when covering the local teams. You used to posture as a hard nosed, no nonsense, non-homer reporter. You even wrote articles advocating kicking the Seahawks out of town so we could “save” the Kingdome and turn it into a huge shopping mall. A couple years ago you were calling for UW to terminate its football program and that the state would replace that with a “Husky Football Apprenticeship Academy”, unaffiliated with UW, which players would attend to learn football and play for pay, and do nothing else academically. Yes, it’s stupid, but at least it wasn’t the shameless homerism we see from you today.

  • ryanack

    That was a horrible reversal by the officials. You do not take the outcome of a game from the players on the field when the call on the field is a catch and then you take all that time and we got to see every version of the replay that they did and nowhere can you see the catch drop and hit the ground. A great game with a crappy ending thanks to the officials

  • StanfordFan

    Full disclosure: Stanford fan here. I was at the game Saturday night – were those of you who are now whining about it, including the supposed journalist Mr. Thiel, there? I doubt it.
    I can tell you that Stanford fans were hushed, and worried, when we saw two of our best and toughest players – Shane Skov and Ben Gardner – go down, writhing in pain. Particularly when Skov was grabbing at his knee – after suffering a season ending ACL in 2011. I was disgusted at the classless boos by the UW fans at the game. And to now hear and read that Sark is also making accusations of fake injuries by two great football players is disheartening at best.
    No one but the two players in question can know how they were feeling when they went down, but it sure looked from the plays, and from their writhing in pain on the field, that they were hurt. And clips and still photos of the plays make an even more compelling case for their not getting up right away. Assuming otherwise, or, worse, asserting it as a supposed fact, is really pathetic and a sad way to honor a team that played their hearts out on Saturday night.
    Interesting that in all this whining none of the UW fans, or its coach, acknowledge that UW is the most penalized team in the FBS. Apparently it is fine for UW to play dirty (including a clear late hit on our quarterback, out of bounds, that did not get flagged), but the (most likely erroneous) thought that someone else might be playing dirty is so appalling to them. Double standard much?
    Also, for what it’s worth, from the stands on the 40 yard line on the Stanford side, it looked clearly like a trapped ball, incomplete catch on 4th and 10. I and those in my section were shocked and appalled by the call on the field. It wasn’t a catch and the replay officials were correct.
    So my message to the UW coach and whining fans is: get a life, get over your loss on Saturday, focus on the fact that you mostly played a great game with a lot of gumption, and focus on getting ready to play the Ducks on Saturday. If you lose, I’ll be interested to read about all the injustices that contributed to your lose, since it appears that you can’t believe that you can be beaten legitimately.

    • Wcoast29

      Haha. Sorry. I love your reasoning for why they couldn’t have been faking injuries. How did you put it, “the Stanford fans were hushed, and worried”. Well shoot. That’s proof enough for all of us I think. Since we know that if they were faking it they would’ve told the fans in advance so that they wouldn’t be hushed and worried but instead would be quietly snickering to themselves. Now whether they were faking or not we will never know but I see why they are being accused of it but your reasoning for why they weren’t is pathetic. Now to the incomplete pass. If you were at the 40 yard line regardless which side you were on you wouldn’t have had a good look. If you were on the close side you wouldn’t have been able to see through the sideline players since he was pretty much right at their feet and if you were on the far side you wouldn’t have been close enough to tell. The refs couldn’t tell which is why it took so long to make the decision. If the situation was reversed though would you be sitting here saying “yup. Those refs made the right call by calling that incomplete. Well we tried but Washington was just the better team”. Not a chance. You’d be saying it was ridiculous they overturned the call on the field. Which means that there wasn’t conclusive evidence that it was incomplete since BOTH sides have an argument on it. That’s called INCONCLUSIVE

      • Kara

        Wcoast 29: read much? My describing the reaction of the crowd to the injuries in not reasoning of anything, it was simply a description of the atmosphere at the game. If you actually read what I wrote, you would have seen my statement that “no one but the two players in question can know how they were feeling when they went down.” But actually responding to my actual point wouldn’t allow you to continue your whining, would it? As to where I was sitting, it was on the 40 yard line, close side, above the bench – so I actually could see over the sideline players. And, finally, thanks for telling me what I would have done in your hypothetical. Must be nice to live in your delusional world.

  • jafco

    “…Equally annoying for Sarkisian was Stanford’s late-game tactic of faking injuries to slow down Washington’s uptempo offense. At least two players went down in theatrical agony and staggered off, only to return in a couple of plays….”

    Game, set, match, eh? What a despicable accusation from a low-ball coach (and repeated by a low-ball “journalist”). I am a Stanford fan, and I’ve watched virtually every Stanford game over the last three years multiple times. Against really fast-paced teams (AZ 2012, 104 plays vs. Stanford) and Oregon 2012, 93 plays, not one Stanford player hurt and limping off field – and Stanford won both those games. UW’s 81 plays this game hardly matter. One of those injuries was in, what, the first minute or so of the second half? Why would they “fake” an injury then? Why not at the end of the 18-play drive that netted Stanford an interception? Because Stanford doesn’t play that way. But apparently, UW coaches and fans think that way. Good luck to you next week, losers.