Stanford-Cal game thread - Printable Version

Stanford-Cal 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-Cal game thread (/thread-13083.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - jacketree - 11-19-2016

What the Hall?

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - martyup - 11-19-2016

How was that not PI?Â Defender had back to the ball and hands in the face of the receiver.Â Classic PI.Â >:(

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 11-19-2016

First half takeaways:

Hall is having a rough day
Chryst has been effective but needs to do a better job of finding favorable matchups deep (his deep accuracy has been lacking as well)
The tackling has been awful and is costing the team points

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - JohnR34231 - 11-19-2016

Yeah, I don't know if Kal's defense is really playing that well, or we are just making them look like they are playing well. Our passing attack is still too hit and miss.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - Gauss - 11-19-2016

Well, 17-14 in the half for the good guys.

An interesting game, where Stanford seems to have the upper-hand, but the bears seem to be fighting a bit harder. The first touchdown by Hansen came from a terrible angle by Lloyd, and the incredible power and speed from the bear. We scored with a couple of great plays by Chryst, both running and throwing. McCaffrey has been McCaffrey, running with vision, elusiveness, and power. JJ with a few nice catches on the pleasant side, and bad drop by Irwin and a very disappointing game by Hall on the worrying side.

We should be favored for the 2nd half, but it's anybody's (Big) game. Let's go Cardinal

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 11-19-2016

Stanford is averaging 6.9 yards per play, compared to 6.8 for Cal. Defense has to buckle down in the second half.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - HisKneeWasDown - 11-19-2016

FYI not sure if P12N showed it but JJAW jogged off the field shaking out his arm. Looks like a stinger. Hopefully a non issue.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - CompSci87 - 11-19-2016

(11-19-2016, 05:29 PM)HisKneeWasDown link Wrote:FYI not sure if P12N showed it but JJAW jogged off the field shaking out his arm. Looks like a stinger. Hopefully a non issue.

Thanks. From TV I couldn't tell what the injury was.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - jacketree - 11-19-2016

Waiting for them to throw out of that quick kick formation.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - JohnR34231 - 11-19-2016

Once gain, we need a drive.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - martyup - 11-19-2016

That was a scary drive.Â Nice to see they got no points out of it.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - CompSci87 - 11-19-2016

(11-19-2016, 05:39 PM)jacketree link Wrote:Waiting for them to throw out of that quick kick formation.

I guess we'll never line up a deep safety who's a return threat against that formation on 4th down. :/

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - HisKneeWasDown - 11-19-2016

BOOM!!

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - martyup - 11-19-2016

[Image: giphy.gif]

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 11-19-2016

My favorite part of that play was McCaffrey waiting patiently in the end zone for someone to come down and celebrate with him. Also, nice to see that it was JJAW.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - jacketree - 11-19-2016

So I guess 12:27 in the third quarter.

(In response to earlier question on when record breaking thing would start.)

Play some defense.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - martyup - 11-19-2016

Time to take down that rushing record.

[Image: McCaffrey.gif]

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - JohnR34231 - 11-19-2016

It ain't over, but we needed that one.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - TreesAndBirds - 11-19-2016

CM now has 216 yards rushing.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - CompSci87 - 11-19-2016

Whoop whoop!

(I tried to write whoooo hoooo, but Android auto-correct liked the above better.)