The CardBoard
UW pauses football activities - 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: UW pauses football activities (/thread-21127.html)

Pages: 1 2

RE: UW pauses football activities - teejers1 - 12-10-2020

(12-10-2020, 10:38 AM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:  
(12-10-2020, 05:31 AM)JustAnotherFan Wrote:  Update: BigTen officially changed the rules. Ohio State is in the championship game.

Hah! Well, the Pac-12 likes to follow the Big Ten, so we'll see what happens!

FWIW, I think the Big Ten's decision was a little easier.  They lowered the minimum number of games to qualify, but they didn't do away with the whole East/West concept.  Even in an alternate universe where Michigan might have beaten OSU this weekend, OSU would have made the Big Ten CCG by tie-breaker over Indiana based on their head-to-head result.

https://bigten.org/standings.aspx?path=football

I acknowledge Colorado's gripe, but personally I think it's wrong to change the rules of the game midstream.  There was a year where Stanford and Oregon were both 8-1 and clearly way more deserving than anyone in the South, but 6-3 UCLA got in.  You could say it's because Stanford beat Oregon that year and everyone in the division got to play everyone, but as I recall, Stanford had just beaten UCLA that year, too. (tbt Drew Terrell's catch in the rain to put us on top - loved that CCG at Stanford Stadium, probably just because it was a small but fervent crowd in the rain...)

I think the "Colorado is undefeated" argument is fairly hollow, too.  Undefeated is a sort of arbitrary concept, especially when there has only been 5 games.  Coastal Carolina and others are undefeated, too.

You could also make the point, if you were Oregon, that they pulverized us and Colorado only edged us out.  (It would be a bad point if someone actually watched the games and knew the circumstances, but this would not stop Duck Fan from making it...)

And let's not forget, the schedule is unbalanced and unfair every single year, in that the cross-division matchups are unbalanced.  This actually works against Stanford most of the time in terms of strength of schedule because we draw USC and UCLA every year. (Ironically, this year it was unfair because we drew Colorado, which figured to be the easiest team to beat in the South but turned out to be one of the two best teams.  Had we drawn Arizona or if the Colorado game had been pre-empted by Covid, we'd be thinking about the CCG now.  I'm not saying we'd deserve it, either, but just making the point that schedules are never completely fair.)  

I can't tell you how many girls soccer tournaments I've attended where my daughter's team seemed to deserve a spot in the finals, but some team in the other bracket had a much easier draw against teams that we always beat. That's just the way it goes. The 10 year-old girls ultimately understand. 

My point is that the rules are never completely fair and you just have to play by the pre-established rules.  If it meant the difference between a CFP berth and no berth (as in the Ohio State case), then maybe I'd be on-board for the sake of pragmatism, but in nearly all cases I feel, in sports, the rules are the rules.

I also feel that there's a non-zero chance that either USC or Colorado will lose this weekend... in fact, I'm expecting it!

1.  No one is saying you change the rules now - wait for this weekend's results;

2.  This entire season is "on the fly," so who cares if the traditional rules are modified, especially in the example of pitting the only two undefeated teams (if it happens) against each other in a CCG?

3.  Relatively speaking, I really only care about Stanford-OSU, and  I have this feeling that a lot of Stanford fans think "UW is the norm" for Stanford's offense.  Um . . . no.  It is quite the outlier, especially on third down conversion - and especially on third-and-long conversions.  If Stanford reverts to form . . . trouble, even against OSU with a backup QB.  And that last phrase is worth big eyes and a "Yikes!"

RE: UW pauses football activities - CowboyIndian - 12-10-2020

(12-10-2020, 10:51 AM)teejers1 Wrote:  I have this feeling that a lot of Stanford fans think "UW is the norm" for Stanford's offense.  Um . . . no.  It is quite the outlier, especially on third down conversion - and especially on third-and-long conversions.  If Stanford reverts to form . . . trouble, even against OSU with a backup QB.  And that last phrase is worth big eyes and a "Yikes!"

The fun never stops in Teejerland.

RE: UW pauses football activities - Phogge - 12-10-2020

Nobody under 60 will get it but is Teejerland an E Ticket ride?

RE: UW pauses football activities - OutsiderFan - 12-10-2020

One can make a strong argument Stanford would have beat Oregon and Colorado if Mills wasn't ruled out because of bogus Covid test result.

So the idea Oregon "pulverized" Stanford comes with a bolder-sized grain of salt.

RE: UW pauses football activities - magnus - 12-10-2020

(12-10-2020, 11:31 AM)Phogge Wrote:  Nobody under 60 will get it but is Teejerland an E Ticket ride?

Nice.  

Ticket based rides were still used until the early 80s at Magic Kingdom so folks in their mid 40s could have still experienced them.

RE: UW pauses football activities - cardcrimson - 12-10-2020

(12-10-2020, 11:31 AM)Phogge Wrote:  Nobody under 60 will get it but is Teejerland an E Ticket ride?
59 and 10.5 months. Think we still have some ticket books lying around somewhere. Of course only A and B tickets were left. . . .

RE: UW pauses football activities - CardinalSagehen - 12-12-2020

(12-10-2020, 10:38 AM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:  I also feel that there's a non-zero chance that either USC or Colorado will lose this weekend... in fact, I'm expecting it!

In hindsight, this was a lay-up and I don't deserve much credit for it.  I was actually more expecting Colorado to lose than USC, because the opposition was stronger than their record, 5-0 doesn't really prove much, and teams often lose when they start to whine about things they can't control.  

UCLA is really improving on defense and I wouldn't be surprised to see them beat SC today, too.  I'd say that game's a toss-up.  Wouldn't it be ironic for the Pac-12 if both SC and Colorado lose this weekend?

RE: UW pauses football activities - teejers1 - 12-12-2020

(12-12-2020, 03:30 PM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:  
(12-10-2020, 10:38 AM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:  I also feel that there's a non-zero chance that either USC or Colorado will lose this weekend... in fact, I'm expecting it!

In hindsight, this was a lay-up and I don't deserve much credit for it.  I was actually more expecting Colorado to lose than USC, because the opposition was stronger than their record, 5-0 doesn't really prove much, and teams often lose when they start to whine about things they can't control.  

UCLA is really improving on defense and I wouldn't be surprised to see them beat SC today, too.  I'd say that game's a toss-up.  Wouldn't it be ironic for the Pac-12 if both SC and Colorado lose this weekend?

Ironic isn't the word I'd use; nor expected.  But it's not THAT surprising, is it?  There is a lot of mediocre-average in the P12, with some heee-inus sprinkled in (see Arizona).

RE: UW pauses football activities - d4cohn - 12-13-2020

(12-12-2020, 07:54 PM)teejers1 Wrote:  
(12-12-2020, 03:30 PM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:  
(12-10-2020, 10:38 AM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:  I also feel that there's a non-zero chance that either USC or Colorado will lose this weekend... in fact, I'm expecting it!

In hindsight, this was a lay-up and I don't deserve much credit for it.  I was actually more expecting Colorado to lose than USC, because the opposition was stronger than their record, 5-0 doesn't really prove much, and teams often lose when they start to whine about things they can't control.  

UCLA is really improving on defense and I wouldn't be surprised to see them beat SC today, too.  I'd say that game's a toss-up.  Wouldn't it be ironic for the Pac-12 if both SC and Colorado lose this weekend?

Ironic isn't the word I'd use; nor expected.  But it's not THAT surprising, is it?  There is a lot of mediocre-average in the P12, with some heee-inus sprinkled in (see Arizona).

SC needed a last minute TD to beat Arizona (who have now fired their coach).

RE: UW pauses football activities - SamuelMcF - 12-13-2020

(12-13-2020, 12:08 AM)d4cohn Wrote:  
(12-12-2020, 07:54 PM)teejers1 Wrote:  
(12-12-2020, 03:30 PM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:  
(12-10-2020, 10:38 AM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:  I also feel that there's a non-zero chance that either USC or Colorado will lose this weekend... in fact, I'm expecting it!

In hindsight, this was a lay-up and I don't deserve much credit for it.  I was actually more expecting Colorado to lose than USC, because the opposition was stronger than their record, 5-0 doesn't really prove much, and teams often lose when they start to whine about things they can't control.  

UCLA is really improving on defense and I wouldn't be surprised to see them beat SC today, too.  I'd say that game's a toss-up.  Wouldn't it be ironic for the Pac-12 if both SC and Colorado lose this weekend?

Ironic isn't the word I'd use; nor expected.  But it's not THAT surprising, is it?  There is a lot of mediocre-average in the P12, with some heee-inus sprinkled in (see Arizona).

SC needed a last minute TD to beat Arizona (who have now fired their coach).

SC also needed a last minute TD-onside kick-TD to beat ASU by 1 point. ASU then whooped Arizona by 63.

We beat Cal, who beat Oregon, who beat us.

We just beat Oregon State, who beat Oregon, who beat us.

The transitive property doesn't work in CFB.

RE: UW pauses football activities - magnus - 12-14-2020

The league has announced that Oregon will replace UW in the Championship game due to UW not meeting the 53 scholarshipped player limit.

RE: UW pauses football activities - JJJ - 12-14-2020

(12-14-2020, 12:27 PM)magnus Wrote:  The league has announced that Oregon will replace UW in the Championship game due to UW not meeting the 53 scholarshipped player limit.

For those who want to read the official statement:

Quote:The Pac-12 has, after consultation with Washington, made the decision to replace Washington with Oregon as the Pac-12 North Division team to face South Division champion USC in the Pac-12 Football Championship Game scheduled for Friday, December 18.
 
This decision was made under the Pac-12’s football game cancellation policy and Football Championship Game policy due to Washington neither having the minimum 53 scholarship student-athletes available for the game nor the minimum number of scholarship student-athletes at a position group, in each case as a result of a number of positive football student-athlete COVID-19 cases and resulting isolation of additional football student-athletes under contact tracing protocols.
 
Under Pac-12 Football Championship Game policy, the team with the next best record in the North Division, Oregon, will represent the North Division against South Division Champion USC.

https://pac-12.com/article/2020/12/14/pac-12-statement-washington-usc-pac-12-football-championship-game

RE: UW pauses football activities - BostonCard - 12-14-2020

I don't suppose that means that we would move up and face Colorado (again) as a standby in case Oregon too has a COVID-19 outbreak.

BC

RE: UW pauses football activities - oregontim - 12-14-2020

(12-14-2020, 12:27 PM)magnus Wrote:  The league has announced that Oregon will replace UW in the Championship game due to UW not meeting the 53 scholarshipped player limit.

Well, that makes at least one of us here happy. At least until Saturday. I fear the Trojans will win big, so the cheer up here in Eugene will be short lived. As a fan, I'm hoping the ducks discover who they were supposed to be. But as an observer, they did not look good in either of their last two outings. Consistent failure to stop opponents' third downs and also to make their own third downs. They didn't look like a championship team.

RE: UW pauses football activities - magnus - 12-14-2020

(12-14-2020, 03:26 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  I don't suppose that means that we would move up and face Colorado (again) as a standby in case Oregon too has a COVID-19 outbreak.

BC
What is BC reaching for in his lab...