The Hoganing Continues - 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: The Hoganing Continues (/thread-4146.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: The Hoganing Continues (/thread-4146.html)
Re: The Hoganing Continues - LuckE2Bhere - 11-01-2012
(10-31-2012, 02:28 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:Erm, I can't get a read on that statement...anyway, dispassionate response:
Our offense had ONE good drive-- a 13-play, 68-yd drive that ended in a touchdown. The other touchdown was a two-play, 75-yard work of art, but it was a busted play and not a product of sustained offensive success. The field goal came on 8 plays, 33 yards (drive started at STAN42)--hardly sustained success. And don't forget that the defense had to dig deep and score a touchdown to seal the game. When you have to count on your defense scoring to win, your offense is not getting it done :(
All other offensive possessions: six drives ending in punts, averaging 5 plays per drive.
My "Case in point: our last game" comment was intended to tease you a bit, and refute your "Quote from: fullmetal ...
No matter how great your defense is, you will probably lose if your offense can't move the ball and score."
Based on your follow-up response above, it sounds like we're in agreement that 1) our defense was "great" against WSU, and 2) with just a couple of exceptions, our "offense [couldn't] move the ball and score".Â
Nevertheless, I'm pretty sure the scoreboard indicated that we didn't lose! Impossible!?!? ;)
Re: The Hoganing Continues - LuckE2Bhere - 11-01-2012
(10-31-2012, 02:28 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:Erm, I can't get a read on that statement...anyway, dispassionate response:
Our offense had ONE good drive-- a 13-play, 68-yd drive that ended in a touchdown. The other touchdown was a two-play, 75-yard work of art, but it was a busted play and not a product of sustained offensive success. The field goal came on 8 plays, 33 yards (drive started at STAN42)--hardly sustained success. And don't forget that the defense had to dig deep and score a touchdown to seal the game. When you have to count on your defense scoring to win, your offense is not getting it done :(
All other offensive possessions: six drives ending in punts, averaging 5 plays per drive.
My "Case in point: our last game" comment was intended to tease you a bit, and refute your "Quote from: fullmetal ...
No matter how great your defense is, you will probably lose if your offense can't move the ball and score."
Based on your follow-up response above, it sounds like we're in agreement that 1) our defense was "great" against WSU, and 2) with just a couple of exceptions, our "offense [couldn't] move the ball and score".Â
Nevertheless, I'm pretty sure the scoreboard indicated that we didn't lose! Impossible!?!? ;)
Re: The Hoganing Continues - fullmetal - 11-01-2012
As with anything at Stanford, "good enough" is not an acceptable level of effort or preparation. One should also never be satisfied with a level of effort or preparation that results in "good enough."
Re: The Hoganing Continues - LuckE2Bhere - 11-01-2012
Didn't say I was satisfied... just used the mutually-agreed results of our most recent game to disprove your theory (though, to be fair, you did say that "you will probably lose" -- my emphasis).
Re: The Hoganing Continues - Farm93 - 11-01-2012
The goal each week should be a win. The team won. Probably lose did not happen, the team actually won despite below average QB play.
But more importantly for me, the negativity in the stands is out of control. Booing Stanford student athletes is unacceptable for me. This idea that Nunes is not trying hard to win is crazy. The thought that booing will help him or the team is just wrong. Does anyone believe the guys were sitting there coasting along at good enough with an undiscovered ability to play better that was uncovered once fans started to boo? Nunes is clearly not trying to be just "good enough" to keep his starting role. Coach Shaw is clearly not trying to be just "good enough" to keep his job. And at 6-2 the team does not deserve to hear their most loyal fans boo them during a conference win.
I will put it this way. The fan support was not "good enough" last week. There were too many empty seats. There were too many fans that cruised in late. There were too many fans that simply expected Stanford to win by 20 or more. There were too many fans that did very little to help the team win (ie. noise during defensive stands). And there were too many fans willing to grumble and boo when Nunes did not play to the almost impossible Luck standard.
If "Good Enough" is below the Stanford standard then I would submit the Stanford alums in the stands failed to even meet the "Good Enough" standard. Let's start there before throwing a 1st year starter under bus.
Re: The Hoganing Continues - Farm93 - 11-01-2012
The goal each week should be a win. The team won. Probably lose did not happen, the team actually won despite below average QB play.
But more importantly for me, the negativity in the stands is out of control. Booing Stanford student athletes is unacceptable for me. This idea that Nunes is not trying hard to win is crazy. The thought that booing will help him or the team is just wrong. Does anyone believe the guys were sitting there coasting along at good enough with an undiscovered ability to play better that was uncovered once fans started to boo? Nunes is clearly not trying to be just "good enough" to keep his starting role. Coach Shaw is clearly not trying to be just "good enough" to keep his job. And at 6-2 the team does not deserve to hear their most loyal fans boo them during a conference win.
I will put it this way. The fan support was not "good enough" last week. There were too many empty seats. There were too many fans that cruised in late. There were too many fans that simply expected Stanford to win by 20 or more. There were too many fans that did very little to help the team win (ie. noise during defensive stands). And there were too many fans willing to grumble and boo when Nunes did not play to the almost impossible Luck standard.
If "Good Enough" is below the Stanford standard then I would submit the Stanford alums in the stands failed to even meet the "Good Enough" standard. Let's start there before throwing a 1st year starter under bus.