The CardBoard
Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - 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: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? (/thread-12753.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - Roberton3 - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 10:45 AM)martyup link Wrote:Is this game really for all the marbles?  After last week's UW overtime win against AZ, I'm not so sure.  The dawgs showed vulnerability. 

The winner of this game has an effective two game lead in the north division.  If UW wins, then for us to  win the north, they would have to lose 2 other Pac-12 games.  With games against OR, OR ST, U$C, UT, ןɐɔ, WA ST and ASU, it is possible that they drop 2 of those games.  UT and OR will be tough road games.  Of course we would have to run the board on Pac-12 games.  Our remaining Pac-12 games will be a bit easier than theirs.  We play WA St, OR, OR St, CO, and ןɐɔ. 

The same is true if we win this game.  We would have to drop 2 of our remaining Pac-12 games and they would have to run the table.

Massey's computer ratings predict that in its 7 conference games after Stanford, Washington will have an expected record of 4.29 wins and 2.71 losses.  It projects Stanford in its 6 conference games after Washington to have an expected record of 5.14 wins and 0.86 losses.  That suggests Stanford has a substantial chance of winning the conference even if it loses to Washington, but not vice-versa.  The difference is partly that Stanford is rated higher, but also that Stanford's remaining conference schedule is significantly easier.

Of course, that's just one rating system, and this early in the season, computer ratings are still heavily based on the ratings at the start of the season (I think Massey uses last season's result as the start for this year).  But it still says something.

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - Roberton3 - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 10:45 AM)martyup link Wrote:Is this game really for all the marbles?  After last week's UW overtime win against AZ, I'm not so sure.  The dawgs showed vulnerability. 

The winner of this game has an effective two game lead in the north division.  If UW wins, then for us to  win the north, they would have to lose 2 other Pac-12 games.  With games against OR, OR ST, U$C, UT, ןɐɔ, WA ST and ASU, it is possible that they drop 2 of those games.  UT and OR will be tough road games.  Of course we would have to run the board on Pac-12 games.  Our remaining Pac-12 games will be a bit easier than theirs.  We play WA St, OR, OR St, CO, and ןɐɔ. 

The same is true if we win this game.  We would have to drop 2 of our remaining Pac-12 games and they would have to run the table.

Massey's computer ratings predict that in its 7 conference games after Stanford, Washington will have an expected record of 4.29 wins and 2.71 losses.  It projects Stanford in its 6 conference games after Washington to have an expected record of 5.14 wins and 0.86 losses.  That suggests Stanford has a substantial chance of winning the conference even if it loses to Washington, but not vice-versa.  The difference is partly that Stanford is rated higher, but also that Stanford's remaining conference schedule is significantly easier.

Of course, that's just one rating system, and this early in the season, computer ratings are still heavily based on the ratings at the start of the season (I think Massey uses last season's result as the start for this year).  But it still says something.

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - Roberton3 - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 10:45 AM)martyup link Wrote:Is this game really for all the marbles?  After last week's UW overtime win against AZ, I'm not so sure.  The dawgs showed vulnerability. 

The winner of this game has an effective two game lead in the north division.  If UW wins, then for us to  win the north, they would have to lose 2 other Pac-12 games.  With games against OR, OR ST, U$C, UT, ןɐɔ, WA ST and ASU, it is possible that they drop 2 of those games.  UT and OR will be tough road games.  Of course we would have to run the board on Pac-12 games.  Our remaining Pac-12 games will be a bit easier than theirs.  We play WA St, OR, OR St, CO, and ןɐɔ. 

The same is true if we win this game.  We would have to drop 2 of our remaining Pac-12 games and they would have to run the table.

Massey's computer ratings predict that in its 7 conference games after Stanford, Washington will have an expected record of 4.29 wins and 2.71 losses.  It projects Stanford in its 6 conference games after Washington to have an expected record of 5.14 wins and 0.86 losses.  That suggests Stanford has a substantial chance of winning the conference even if it loses to Washington, but not vice-versa.  The difference is partly that Stanford is rated higher, but also that Stanford's remaining conference schedule is significantly easier.

Of course, that's just one rating system, and this early in the season, computer ratings are still heavily based on the ratings at the start of the season (I think Massey uses last season's result as the start for this year).  But it still says something.

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - Baysmen - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 08:28 AM)Trevmiesterj link Wrote:Okay, I am getting to the point that I feel these Husky posters must be pulling off some brilliant con to rile up The Cardboard.  It's just not possible that opposing fans can be this ineloquent, this clueless, this reactionary with their posts. 

The only explanation is that this cunning group of Washington fans is playing this board like a Bechstein Grand; every post is a Scud missile of controversy aimed to illicit multiple Cardboarder counter responses. 

Misspelled starting Quarterbacks name?  check.  Not sure where the game is being played?  check.  Outlandish claims of unproven superiority against a perennial PAC-12 Champion that crushed them last year?  CHECK.  The list goes on and we still have a few days to see what gets lobbed into this thread.

Is this what the Japanese felt like when they came up against the transmitted information of the Navajo Code Talkers during WW2?  I am searching for a suitable parallel.

Don't want to engage in verbal jousts. I was just looking for some good natured banter between our fan bases. Yes, it appeared from Stubhub the game was @ Stanford. One of your fellow posters saved me gas and a great deal of disappointment and embarrassment.
Anyway, if you guys come to the game be sure to dress warm (night game) either way, it should be interesting.

Side note: try our Washington wines. You won't be disappointed - especially our Merlots. They drink like a nice Cab.

Enjoy the game! Go Dawgs!

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - Baysmen - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 08:28 AM)Trevmiesterj link Wrote:Okay, I am getting to the point that I feel these Husky posters must be pulling off some brilliant con to rile up The Cardboard.  It's just not possible that opposing fans can be this ineloquent, this clueless, this reactionary with their posts. 

The only explanation is that this cunning group of Washington fans is playing this board like a Bechstein Grand; every post is a Scud missile of controversy aimed to illicit multiple Cardboarder counter responses. 

Misspelled starting Quarterbacks name?  check.  Not sure where the game is being played?  check.  Outlandish claims of unproven superiority against a perennial PAC-12 Champion that crushed them last year?  CHECK.  The list goes on and we still have a few days to see what gets lobbed into this thread.

Is this what the Japanese felt like when they came up against the transmitted information of the Navajo Code Talkers during WW2?  I am searching for a suitable parallel.

Don't want to engage in verbal jousts. I was just looking for some good natured banter between our fan bases. Yes, it appeared from Stubhub the game was @ Stanford. One of your fellow posters saved me gas and a great deal of disappointment and embarrassment.
Anyway, if you guys come to the game be sure to dress warm (night game) either way, it should be interesting.

Side note: try our Washington wines. You won't be disappointed - especially our Merlots. They drink like a nice Cab.

Enjoy the game! Go Dawgs!

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - Baysmen - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 08:28 AM)Trevmiesterj link Wrote:Okay, I am getting to the point that I feel these Husky posters must be pulling off some brilliant con to rile up The Cardboard.  It's just not possible that opposing fans can be this ineloquent, this clueless, this reactionary with their posts. 

The only explanation is that this cunning group of Washington fans is playing this board like a Bechstein Grand; every post is a Scud missile of controversy aimed to illicit multiple Cardboarder counter responses. 

Misspelled starting Quarterbacks name?  check.  Not sure where the game is being played?  check.  Outlandish claims of unproven superiority against a perennial PAC-12 Champion that crushed them last year?  CHECK.  The list goes on and we still have a few days to see what gets lobbed into this thread.

Is this what the Japanese felt like when they came up against the transmitted information of the Navajo Code Talkers during WW2?  I am searching for a suitable parallel.

Don't want to engage in verbal jousts. I was just looking for some good natured banter between our fan bases. Yes, it appeared from Stubhub the game was @ Stanford. One of your fellow posters saved me gas and a great deal of disappointment and embarrassment.
Anyway, if you guys come to the game be sure to dress warm (night game) either way, it should be interesting.

Side note: try our Washington wines. You won't be disappointed - especially our Merlots. They drink like a nice Cab.

Enjoy the game! Go Dawgs!

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - CornFed - 09-29-2016

I went to the game in Seattle one of the years I was in school in the early seventies.  I went with my dorm mate who was from Yakima.  I do not recall how we got into the game but am pretty sure we did not have tickets when we arrived.  There was a grassy slope at the end of the stands where we set up shop for the game.  We were admittedly not passive observers of the game; in fact, we were quite vocal in support of the good guys.  Our advocacy did not sit well with some of the Husky fans who were sitting above us, and as the game went on Bob and I began to be intermittently pelted by beer bottles.  Real bottles, not cans, not plastic bottles!!  :o

Hopefully, Browning's arm is no more accurate than the yahoos that were throwing bottles at us that night.  :P

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - CornFed - 09-29-2016

I went to the game in Seattle one of the years I was in school in the early seventies.  I went with my dorm mate who was from Yakima.  I do not recall how we got into the game but am pretty sure we did not have tickets when we arrived.  There was a grassy slope at the end of the stands where we set up shop for the game.  We were admittedly not passive observers of the game; in fact, we were quite vocal in support of the good guys.  Our advocacy did not sit well with some of the Husky fans who were sitting above us, and as the game went on Bob and I began to be intermittently pelted by beer bottles.  Real bottles, not cans, not plastic bottles!!  :o

Hopefully, Browning's arm is no more accurate than the yahoos that were throwing bottles at us that night.  :P

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - CornFed - 09-29-2016

I went to the game in Seattle one of the years I was in school in the early seventies.  I went with my dorm mate who was from Yakima.  I do not recall how we got into the game but am pretty sure we did not have tickets when we arrived.  There was a grassy slope at the end of the stands where we set up shop for the game.  We were admittedly not passive observers of the game; in fact, we were quite vocal in support of the good guys.  Our advocacy did not sit well with some of the Husky fans who were sitting above us, and as the game went on Bob and I began to be intermittently pelted by beer bottles.  Real bottles, not cans, not plastic bottles!!  :o

Hopefully, Browning's arm is no more accurate than the yahoos that were throwing bottles at us that night.  :P

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - Big Daog - 09-29-2016

(09-28-2016, 05:57 PM)Publius link Wrote:[quote author=Purplehaze206 link=topic=15797.msg173678#msg173678 date=1475106162]
Wait, are you racial profiling me  because I am from Seattle I mut smoke ganja? Not cool  bro. Not everyone is a pot head FYI.

I know that the math doesn't add up to much, but I am feelin it this week. It's time for David to slay the biblical dragon.

The question is this: are we David  the 7-11 clerk or are we David Bruce Banner about  to get angry?

You're the one who chose PurpleHaze as a handle, made outlandish claims, and got the following facts wrong: your quarterback's name, location of the game and its date.  And now you've mixed up the Bible (David slew Goliath, a man) with a medieval hagiography (St. George and the Dragon).  This isn't racial profiling.  It's "What are you smoking?"-profiling.

I and many here do respect your coach.  There are those among us that had wished he had joined our program (twice).  I'm sure he's running a clean program unlike his predecessors.  Here's to a well-played game.

BTW the Stanford football players resemble Bruce Banner (smart) and the Hulk (strong).
[/quote]

I know your being sarkastic but it's Kaitlyn now.

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - Big Daog - 09-29-2016

(09-28-2016, 05:57 PM)Publius link Wrote:[quote author=Purplehaze206 link=topic=15797.msg173678#msg173678 date=1475106162]
Wait, are you racial profiling me  because I am from Seattle I mut smoke ganja? Not cool  bro. Not everyone is a pot head FYI.

I know that the math doesn't add up to much, but I am feelin it this week. It's time for David to slay the biblical dragon.

The question is this: are we David  the 7-11 clerk or are we David Bruce Banner about  to get angry?

You're the one who chose PurpleHaze as a handle, made outlandish claims, and got the following facts wrong: your quarterback's name, location of the game and its date.  And now you've mixed up the Bible (David slew Goliath, a man) with a medieval hagiography (St. George and the Dragon).  This isn't racial profiling.  It's "What are you smoking?"-profiling.

I and many here do respect your coach.  There are those among us that had wished he had joined our program (twice).  I'm sure he's running a clean program unlike his predecessors.  Here's to a well-played game.

BTW the Stanford football players resemble Bruce Banner (smart) and the Hulk (strong).
[/quote]

I know your being sarkastic but it's Kaitlyn now.

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - Big Daog - 09-29-2016

(09-28-2016, 05:57 PM)Publius link Wrote:[quote author=Purplehaze206 link=topic=15797.msg173678#msg173678 date=1475106162]
Wait, are you racial profiling me  because I am from Seattle I mut smoke ganja? Not cool  bro. Not everyone is a pot head FYI.

I know that the math doesn't add up to much, but I am feelin it this week. It's time for David to slay the biblical dragon.

The question is this: are we David  the 7-11 clerk or are we David Bruce Banner about  to get angry?

You're the one who chose PurpleHaze as a handle, made outlandish claims, and got the following facts wrong: your quarterback's name, location of the game and its date.  And now you've mixed up the Bible (David slew Goliath, a man) with a medieval hagiography (St. George and the Dragon).  This isn't racial profiling.  It's "What are you smoking?"-profiling.

I and many here do respect your coach.  There are those among us that had wished he had joined our program (twice).  I'm sure he's running a clean program unlike his predecessors.  Here's to a well-played game.

BTW the Stanford football players resemble Bruce Banner (smart) and the Hulk (strong).
[/quote]

I know your being sarkastic but it's Kaitlyn now.

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - Purplehaze206 - 09-29-2016

Look at the spreadsheets, they have not moved from 3 all week in Vegas. This means the game is going to be a snot fest like the olden days. Ask Racey B, he was there. Big ass phone and a busta ass umbrella don't lye.

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - Purplehaze206 - 09-29-2016

Look at the spreadsheets, they have not moved from 3 all week in Vegas. This means the game is going to be a snot fest like the olden days. Ask Racey B, he was there. Big ass phone and a busta ass umbrella don't lye.

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - Purplehaze206 - 09-29-2016

Look at the spreadsheets, they have not moved from 3 all week in Vegas. This means the game is going to be a snot fest like the olden days. Ask Racey B, he was there. Big ass phone and a busta ass umbrella don't lye.

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - martyup - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 04:04 PM)Big Daog link Wrote:[quote author=Publius link=topic=15797.msg173679#msg173679 date=1475110663]
[quote author=Purplehaze206 link=topic=15797.msg173678#msg173678 date=1475106162]
Wait, are you racial profiling me  because I am from Seattle I mut smoke ganja? Not cool  bro. Not everyone is a pot head FYI.

I know that the math doesn't add up to much, but I am feelin it this week. It's time for David to slay the biblical dragon.

The question is this: are we David  the 7-11 clerk or are we David Bruce Banner about  to get angry?

You're the one who chose PurpleHaze as a handle, made outlandish claims, and got the following facts wrong: your quarterback's name, location of the game and its date.  And now you've mixed up the Bible (David slew Goliath, a man) with a medieval hagiography (St. George and the Dragon).  This isn't racial profiling.  It's "What are you smoking?"-profiling.

I and many here do respect your coach.  There are those among us that had wished he had joined our program (twice).  I'm sure he's running a clean program unlike his predecessors.  Here's to a well-played game.

BTW the Stanford football players resemble Bruce Banner (smart) and the Hulk (strong).
[/quote]

I know your being sarkastic but it's Kaitlyn now.
[/quote]

Bruce Banner is no Bruce Jenner and is certainly not now known as Kaitlyn.

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - martyup - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 04:04 PM)Big Daog link Wrote:[quote author=Publius link=topic=15797.msg173679#msg173679 date=1475110663]
[quote author=Purplehaze206 link=topic=15797.msg173678#msg173678 date=1475106162]
Wait, are you racial profiling me  because I am from Seattle I mut smoke ganja? Not cool  bro. Not everyone is a pot head FYI.

I know that the math doesn't add up to much, but I am feelin it this week. It's time for David to slay the biblical dragon.

The question is this: are we David  the 7-11 clerk or are we David Bruce Banner about  to get angry?

You're the one who chose PurpleHaze as a handle, made outlandish claims, and got the following facts wrong: your quarterback's name, location of the game and its date.  And now you've mixed up the Bible (David slew Goliath, a man) with a medieval hagiography (St. George and the Dragon).  This isn't racial profiling.  It's "What are you smoking?"-profiling.

I and many here do respect your coach.  There are those among us that had wished he had joined our program (twice).  I'm sure he's running a clean program unlike his predecessors.  Here's to a well-played game.

BTW the Stanford football players resemble Bruce Banner (smart) and the Hulk (strong).
[/quote]

I know your being sarkastic but it's Kaitlyn now.
[/quote]

Bruce Banner is no Bruce Jenner and is certainly not now known as Kaitlyn.

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - martyup - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 04:04 PM)Big Daog link Wrote:[quote author=Publius link=topic=15797.msg173679#msg173679 date=1475110663]
[quote author=Purplehaze206 link=topic=15797.msg173678#msg173678 date=1475106162]
Wait, are you racial profiling me  because I am from Seattle I mut smoke ganja? Not cool  bro. Not everyone is a pot head FYI.

I know that the math doesn't add up to much, but I am feelin it this week. It's time for David to slay the biblical dragon.

The question is this: are we David  the 7-11 clerk or are we David Bruce Banner about  to get angry?

You're the one who chose PurpleHaze as a handle, made outlandish claims, and got the following facts wrong: your quarterback's name, location of the game and its date.  And now you've mixed up the Bible (David slew Goliath, a man) with a medieval hagiography (St. George and the Dragon).  This isn't racial profiling.  It's "What are you smoking?"-profiling.

I and many here do respect your coach.  There are those among us that had wished he had joined our program (twice).  I'm sure he's running a clean program unlike his predecessors.  Here's to a well-played game.

BTW the Stanford football players resemble Bruce Banner (smart) and the Hulk (strong).
[/quote]

I know your being sarkastic but it's Kaitlyn now.
[/quote]

Bruce Banner is no Bruce Jenner and is certainly not now known as Kaitlyn.

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - BostonCard - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 08:28 AM)Trevmiesterj link Wrote:The only explanation is that this cunning group of Washington fans is playing this board like a Bechstein Grand; every post is a Scud missile of controversy aimed to illicit multiple Cardboarder counter responses. 

As I recall, there were some Oregon fans that liked to troll UW by posing as their fans and posting on opponents' message boards as caricatures of a Washington fan.  That's what I am assuming is going on.

BC

Re: Washington @ Stanford: the game 4 all the marbles? - BostonCard - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 08:28 AM)Trevmiesterj link Wrote:The only explanation is that this cunning group of Washington fans is playing this board like a Bechstein Grand; every post is a Scud missile of controversy aimed to illicit multiple Cardboarder counter responses. 

As I recall, there were some Oregon fans that liked to troll UW by posing as their fans and posting on opponents' message boards as caricatures of a Washington fan.  That's what I am assuming is going on.

BC