The Eye Test: UCLA Gets a Midseason Reset Against Stanford

Everything old is new again, including beating down a bad Stanford team.

The UCLA defense continued its special season against Stanford. (Photo credit: @UCLAFootball)

---

In the postgame article for this game, I stated the following:

Honestly, it’s hard to take too much from this game, because Stanford is a bad football team currently. It was a nice get-right game for the Bruins, and on a spiritual level I’m sure UCLA fans are happy to end the Stanford series for now with an absolute shelling of the Cardinal, but in terms of what this means for the rest of the season? It’s hard to say

After a few rewatches, I think that sentiment still holds true. This game was a glorified scrimmage only notable because the opponent happens to be one of the great UCLA bogeymen of the 21st century. And I don’t know that I can say that UCLA has outgrown Stanford because I think it would be easier to say that Stanford has regressed tremendously back to the pre-Harbaugh days.

So I apologize if this Eye Test ends up shorter than previous weeks, but there really was not much to talk about for many groups. With one major exception.

Seems as good a place as any to start!

Offense

Quarterback: A-

Let’s talk about this game first and then move on to the bigger conversation.

Chip Kelly made the switch in this game, moving away from starting true freshman Dante Moore and instead reinserting redshirt junior Ethan Garbers into the role he held to start the year. Kelly was clearly looking for a steadier presence at the quarterback position, and Garbers simply has more experience at this level. In this game, he looked fine, going 20-28 for 240 yards and two touchdowns, but it wasn’t his stats that were important but what he did with the football. Specifically, he did not turn the ball over, instead protecting the ball and making the safe throw all game. Does that mean he dazzled or really looked impressive? Not really, but I’ll get to why that might not matter in a second. Moore did ultimately see the field for a bit late, and he looked much better against a bad Stanford defense than he has in recent weeks.

Now for the longer view of this: I hate the move.

Here’s the thing you should know: Stanford is a bad defense, and this is the exact type of game that Dante Moore could have used to rebuild his confidence after three poor performances against three very good defenses. As I’ve stated before, a lot of the issues Moore was having could be pinpointed to a combination of poor line play and playcalling asking him to do too much. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the return of Garbers to the role also coincided with a switch in gameplan to quicker passes to the flat to try and minimize the impact of the offensive line, but this is something that should have occurred much earlier when Moore was starting. Instead, it feels like Chip Kelly fell in love with his ability to push the ball downfield and kept calling longer-developing pass plays despite all evidence that the offensive line was not going to be able to hold up.

The entire Dante Moore saga to this point appears to be a case of coaching malpractice. They refused to adapt the playcalling to the existing reality of what Moore and the offensive line were capable of against the three best defenses they’ve played, and now that they’re getting to the soft part of the schedule (Stanford and Colorado both have FCS-level defenses) he’s getting pulled. It’s the equivalent of throwing a child into the deep end to teach them how to swim, and then when they start drowning you decide they don’t get to swim again for another year.

With Garbers burning his redshirt in the process, you can almost guarantee he’ll be the starter from here on out. In the short term, that’s probably fine, as the UCLA defense is playing so well that the offense simply needs competent play to secure some wins. But if the Bruins get into a game where offense is required, I don’t know if Garbers is going to be able to rise to the occasion; he’s yet to face a defense this year even close to the levels that Moore has, and won’t do so until Arizona State of all teams (Arizona will provide a different challenge, but their defense is more suspect). It’s a situation with no clear answer, and it sucks.

Offensive Line: C

Pass blocking is still suspect, which isn’t great considering the level of the opponent. The offensive line would have given up more than four sacks if Garbers wasn’t so willing to scramble to extend plays (the fact that Moore also scrambled when he came in leads me to believe his lack of running in the previous games was a coaching directive to try and keep him healthy and protect the depth chart since Garbers would likely not be playing again, which lol). Run blocking also wasn’t great; the Bruins really had to grind things out on the ground despite what statistically should have been a huge advantage. At this point, the line is what it is, and anyone telling you that this line is Good, Actually is just gaslighting you.

Running Back: B+

Carson Steele scored three touchdowns on his birthday! That’s neat.

Overall: B-

This was a fine bounceback performance from the offense after the previous three games, but considering the quality of the Stanford defense, this should have been more dominant. The offensive line play in particular still stands out as problematic and does not appear like it will be fixed this season, which is going to put a natural cap on how good this unit can be.

Defense

Overall: A-

Really simple grade here. UCLA was just better at all three levels, and the only thing positive you can say for the Cardinal here is that it looks like they might have something with Ashton Daniels, as he was forced to make a ton of tough throws and hit quite a few times. But ultimately it was never going to be enough because Stanford was incapable of running against the Bruin defense, and if they can make you one-dimensional, then this unit has already won.

Special Teams

Overall: D+

New theory: if RJ Lopez starts missing kicks, then you can almost guarantee a UCLA victory. This is the second time in three weeks that the kicking game has looked shaky, and it hasn’t cost the Bruins yet, but it really feels like it’s coming and at that point I will just sit here quietly. I won’t even say “I told you so,” it will simply be implied.

The only reason this grade is higher than a D or a straight F is that kick coverage looked fairly good. Stanford had four kick returns, and none of them went for longer than 21 yards. In fact, two Cardinal drives started within the 15-yard line, which is really good especially as it appeared Stanford was hoping for a big return to spark something.

Coaching

Offensive Gameplan: C

I am, of course, utterly annoyed at the quarterback switch, but obviously, this game would also feature a switch in the strategy employed on offense. Gone were the long-developing passing routes of the past three games (or at the very least deemphasized) and replaced with quick passes to the sidelines to get the ball in the hands of playmakers and allow them to make plays. Against a team like Stanford, that’s all that was really needed, but I am annoyed that these wrinkles were never put in place in prior weeks, especially when they could have helped Moore establish a rhythm and better protect him.

Generally, though, the gameplan was fairly vanilla in this one, which makes sense because, as I’ve repeatedly said, Stanford is bad.

Defensive Gameplan: B

Much like with the offense, the defensive gameplan did not have to be that adventurous given the talent gaps between the two teams. That’s basically it. I’m sure Colorado this week will provide more of a challenge, with a really good QB and some talent at receivers.

Overall: B-

Good to see the Bruins not sleepwalk through an overmatched opponent, which is a positive for the coaches, but this was probably one of the easier coaching jobs they’ve had to do this year. The offensive game plan still leaves some to be desired but, again, they just did not have to do much of anything to win this game.

Vibes

Vibe check: Ending with a whimper

I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that Stanford will remain a special part of the damaged psyche that is the UCLA fan experience. For over a decade, the Cardinal were an unassailable mountain that multiple UCLA coaches failed to climb and this caused them to lose their way in the process. Jim Mora straight-up changed his entire offensive and defensive philosophies to try and beat Stanford and failed so badly that he was fired a year later. I find it interesting that UCLA ends this series for now in the driver’s seat, not because they have become the unassailable rock that Stanford was, but rather because the Cardinal have regressed well beyond what they used to be. It was a gradual process at first but accelerated over the past few years into the shell of a program it currently is, and honestly, I have no idea how Stanford is supposed to recover now that they will be in the ACC with reduced payments and having to spend way more on travel at a school that has notoriously tried cutting multiple athletics programs for years. It has always felt like the Stanford admin would be more than ok with doing away with football completely, and to see a program with this lineage, that can boast both John Elway and Andrew Luck, potentially fall by the wayside is sad.

But on the flip side, screw this school, they deserve nothing and absolutely destroying them is the perfect way to end this series for now. One can only hope Cal Berkeley will meet a similar fate.

Final Composite

Offense grade: B-

Defense grade: A-

Special Teams grade: D+

Coaching grade: B-

Vibe check: Ending with a whimper

Final grade for Stanford Cardinal: B- (2.79)

For reference, here are the past grades from the season:

Coastal Carolina Chanticleers: B- (2.66)

San Diego State Aztecs: A- (3.6)

North Carolina Central Eagles: Pass

Utah Utes: C+ (2.3)

Washington State Cougars: B (2.97)

Oregon State Beavers: C- (1.74)

---

With Colorado coming to town, the Bruins are in for a different kind of test. On paper, this should be an easy victory, but Colorado does possess a decent amount of talent in their starters, and their offense will provide a solid test for the secondary. Throw in the Deion factor of it all, and it will be interesting to see if the Bruins can block out the noise and establish themselves.

Go Bruins!

---

Thanks again for supporting The Mighty Bruin. Your paid subscriptions make this site possible. Questions, comments, story ideas, angry missives and more can be sent to @TheMightyBruin on Twitter.