Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread (/thread-14304.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread (/thread-14304.html)
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - Treefence - 09-16-2017
I had hopes going into this season that Chryst might show franchise QB ability, but that ship has sailed. Luckily we still have other guys in the pipeline, but it's Costello or bust for this season. Burns and Chryst are Nunes 2.0...
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - Phogge - 09-16-2017
Outhit, out thought, outplayed. The Cordova type throw should be the final straw. Time to build for the future. If this continues could easily be 3-9.
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - JohnR34231 - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 11:16 PM)jacketree link Wrote:Shaw quit with time on the clock.
Dumpster fire.
Yeah, why throw what was basically a Hail Mary at that point. There was a minute to go and we had two time outs. We just needed to get a field goal to send it into OT.
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - SpokaneLee - 09-16-2017
It looked like there was no thought of a 2-minute offense, with intermediate passes to march down the field. Chryst just launched that ball like it was an end of the game Hail Mary. WTF?
Terrible offensive coaching.
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - BostonCard - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 11:18 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=17411.msg201058#msg201058 date=1505628949]
[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=17411.msg201047#msg201047 date=1505628829]
The worst Stanford loss since, hell, I can't remember.
Northwestern
[/quote]
Northwestern was at least a ten win team in a good conference with a good defense. Nope, not in the same category.
[/quote]
We did not think it at the time. Yes, it turned out Northwestern was a good team, but at the time we played them, we thought they were a bottom half of the Big Ten team.
SDSU is probably not at that level, but they might well be ranked or just outside the top-25 next week, and they will compete for the Mountain West title.
BC
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - jacketree - 09-16-2017
Not sure SDSU is the lesser team. That's the real problem. They have Love and not much else. Apparently #2 doesn't realize it's legal to use his arms to tackle. Aztecs look like the better team and deservedly won.
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - Scott - 09-16-2017
Chryst didn't even face a bunch of good defenses before he went bust. I'd say that makes Burns the better QB.
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 11:21 PM)jacketree link Wrote:Not sure SDSU is the lesser team. That's the real problem. They have Love and not much else. Apparently #2 doesn't realize it's legal to use his arms to tackle. Aztecs look like the better team and deservedly won.
That was disgraceful.
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - JJJ - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 11:20 PM)JPRI link Wrote:[quote author=jacketree link=topic=17411.msg201059#msg201059 date=1505628967]
Shaw quit with time on the clock.
Dumpster fire.
Yeah, why throw what was basically a Hail Mary at that point. There was a minute to go and we had two time outs. We just needed to get a field goal to send it into OT.
[/quote]
I was wondering the same thing.
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - BostonCard - 09-16-2017
I agree a shorter pass probably would have been better.
That being said, JJAW was being covered one on one, so it was a favorable match-up. Chryst had plenty of time in the pocket. That should have been a big gain, and would have been but Chryst had an entirely forgettable day today. I think WIM probably had the right idea. Make it look like you are going to throw and just run Love. He has as much of a chance of breaking a big one as Chryst and our receiver had of hooking up on a pass of any length. Chryst was 9/20 (45%) and his average completion went 8 yards. Love had 184 yards on 13 caries, and three for over 40 yards. The probabilities favored Love.
BC
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - cardfan77 - 09-16-2017
If this team continue to play the way they played tonight and if the coaches can't make improvements then this will be the first losing season in a long time.Â
Ugh a very frustrated and sad fan here
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - washingtonismoney - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 11:18 PM)double e dub link Wrote:Hello...this team is supposed to be a cream puff. They have one of the worst pass defenses in the country, like Rice bad. How is it the AD's fault that our QB sucks (today) and that our coach calls for FG on the 4 yard line?
um, no it's not. SDSU is 25-6 over the past three years. It's no cream puff. Does Stanford have better talent? Yes. Should it win most of its games versus SDSU? Again, yes.
But the risk/reward is a terrible one. Risk is losing and looking embarrassing. Like right now! Reward is minimal. Very few people know SDSU is actually,like, good, so Stanford will receive little credit for beating them. So SDSU should never have been scheduled and Bernard Muir is bad at his job.
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - Mick - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 11:00 PM)martyup link Wrote:Who's watching from EST @ 2 AM?
Sadly, me.
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - jacketree - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 11:18 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:[quote author=jacketree link=topic=17411.msg201059#msg201059 date=1505628967]
Shaw quit with time on the clock.
Dumpster fire.
Other than hoping for a fumble during the exchange, taking the time outs wouldn't have accomplished anything; SDSU could have ended it with two more knees, regardless of whether we took a time out or not.
Of all the question marks one might have about this game, that seems like a rather trivial complaint.
BC
[/quote]
They were still running plays. Fight to the end unless they take a knee.
I do have less trivial complaints, but I'm sure those will be covered.
Let's see if Shaw can dig out of this mess.
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - lex24 - 09-16-2017
9-20. 72 yards. 3 turnovers. Forgettable is too kind.
(09-16-2017, 11:26 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:I agree a shorter pass probably would have been better.
That being said, JJAW was being covered one on one, so it was a favorable match-up. Chryst had plenty of time in the pocket. That should have been a big gain, and would have been but Chryst had an entirely forgettable day today. I think WIM probably had the right idea. Make it look like you are going to throw and just run Love. He has as much of a chance of breaking a big one as Chryst and our receiver had of hooking up on a pass of any length. Chryst was 9/20 (45%) and his average completion went 8 yards. Love had 184 yards on 13 caries, and three for over 40 yards. The probabilities favored Love.
BC
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - jacketree - 09-16-2017
Nothing wrong with the schedule. Play better.
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - washingtonismoney - 09-16-2017
The thing is, I can play the "stay patient" game as well as anyone. Road game against a pretty good opponent with a track record of success? Sure, fine, I can buy struggles.
The problem isn't the struggles, nor even the attempted solutions. Sometimes you have problems, you try logical solutions to those problems, but the whole time-and-chance-happeneth-to-us-all thing gets you. The solutions don't work. Oh well.
The issue is that the solutions attempted by the coaching staff were ludicrously gimmicky and disconnected to the problems the team was actually experiencing. I mean, come on, shuffling QBs where one is strictly in to seal the backside? Random attempts to plug in various offensive linemen? It's a surrender flag of epic proportions. It's like asking for an intervention.
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - cardcrimson - 09-16-2017
Wow. Those that defended the performance last week, saying that we just got beat by a better team, one that brought their A game, are now turning on the team and the coaches?
Last week, some said the team didn't play hard or particularly well. They said the coaching stunk. The play calling stunk. And those poor fools were crucified by the Stepfords here.
Just sucks that those poor fools were right.
We've been out hustled, out manned, out coached, and out played two weeks in a row. Completely embarrassed tonight, though for some, not completely unexpected.
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - BostonCard - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 11:31 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:The thing is, I can play the "stay patient" game as well as anyone. Road game against a pretty good opponent with a track record of success? Sure, fine, I can buy struggles.
The problem isn't the struggles, nor even the attempted solutions. Sometimes you have problems, you try logical solutions to those problems, but the whole time-and-chance-happeneth-to-us-all thing gets you. The solutions don't work. Oh well.
The issue is that the solutions attempted by the coaching staff were ludicrously gimmicky and disconnected to the problems the team was actually experiencing. I mean, come on, shuffling QBs where one is strictly in to seal the backside? Random attempts to plug in various offensive linemen? It's a surrender flag of epic proportions. It's like asking for an intervention.
As I posted on the other thread... on the shuffling of offensive linemen... well, our line did struggle mightily against USC, so I don't have an issue, per se. If Little is our best guy, then start him despite the inexperience. I'm not a fan of starting highly touted freshmen just because they had 5 stars next to their name, but it's not like our line was a well-oiled machine against USC. The problem, of course, is that if you do shuffle your line, and they are still getting beat, you look like you are panicking.
On the Burns for Chryst... I'm not generally a fan, but those plays did seem like they were working reasonably well (at least better than most of the other stuff we tried). And it is not that more or less gimick-y than the wildcat.
My two biggest concerns today were: a) the offensive line is not protecting the passer very well and b) the quarterback played an awful game. I hope he puts it behind him and doesn't get like Burns after the UW game where he was permanently scarred thereafter.
BC
Re: Stanford at SDSU Game Thread - doubledub - 09-16-2017
(09-16-2017, 11:27 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:[quote author=double e dub link=topic=17411.msg201062#msg201062 date=1505629095]
Hello...this team is supposed to be a cream puff. They have one of the worst pass defenses in the country, like Rice bad. How is it the AD's fault that our QB sucks (today) and that our coach calls for FG on the 4 yard line?
um, no it's not. SDSU is 25-6 over the past three years. It's no cream puff. Does Stanford have better talent? Yes. Should it win most of its games versus SDSU? Again, yes.
But the risk/reward is a terrible one. Risk is losing and looking embarrassing. Like right now! Reward is minimal. Very few people know SDSU is actually,like, good, so Stanford will receive little credit for beating them. So SDSU should never have been scheduled and Bernard Muir is bad at his job.
[/quote]
In 2016 they lost to South Alabama, Wyoming and Colorado State.
In 2015 they lost to Cal, South Alabama and Penn State
In 2014 they lost 6 games
In that stretch they did not beat any ranked teams.
The game with SDSU was scheduled in May 2015 - after SDSU stunk it up against mostly terrible competition.
So remind me again how this is Muir's fault? Is he supposed to see the future?