The CardBoard
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-ןɐɔ game thread - jacketree - 11-19-2016

Mac won't be coming out. Not with this porous defense and quick strike capability on the other side.


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - HisKneeWasDown - 11-19-2016

The Axe!!

[Image: b8zB7cF_1zyWg4RQ02kxpMrKfZCeiEW9_OsADAcA...2-h1098-no]


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - HisKneeWasDown - 11-19-2016

That #99 is a big dude


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 11-19-2016

(11-19-2016, 06:11 PM)jacketree link Wrote:Mac won't be coming out. Not with this porous defense and quick strike capability on the other side.

Right. He should do a lot more damage to the stat sheet before the clock hits :00.


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - Mick - 11-19-2016

How many sacks, TFL,  knockdowns does Stanford have against Webb?


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - jacketree - 11-19-2016

Uh guys. Single score game with more than a quarter left.

31 points won't win this.

Atrocious tackling.


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - martyup - 11-19-2016

(11-19-2016, 06:14 PM)Mick link Wrote:How many sacks, TFL,  knockdowns does Stanford have against Webb?

Zero 


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - JohnR34231 - 11-19-2016

Looks like we're going to have to keep scoring. But you knew that.


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - SeattleTree - 11-19-2016

Why does it seem like Chryst/Burns are constantly having balls batted down at the line of scrimmage, but Webb is not only untouched, none of his passes get batted down?

CMac is going to have to get 400 for the Trees to get the win, because the defense has no answer for draws/screens and is apparently unwilling to tackle.


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 11-19-2016

(11-19-2016, 06:18 PM)SeattleTree link Wrote:Why does it seem like Chryst/Burns are constantly having balls batted down at the line of scrimmage, but Webb is not only untouched, none of his passes get batted down?

The Stanford OL is poor, as has been the pass rush today.


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - JJJ - 11-19-2016

My friend tells me the rushing record for a game is 427. Jus' sayin'...


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - jacketree - 11-19-2016

Like California's jumbo better than ours. Flare passes in the flat to a 350 pounder.


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - jacketree - 11-19-2016

One too few blockers


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - Mick - 11-19-2016

Well, Kall clearly has figured out how to tackle the bubble screen.


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 11-19-2016

(11-19-2016, 06:21 PM)jacketree link Wrote:Like California's jumbo better than ours. Flare passes in the flat to a 350 pounder.

Wonder what kind of hands Herbig has.


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - jacketree - 11-19-2016

Guess I'll be more comfortable with a 4 TD lead, but strong answer.


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - BostonCard - 11-19-2016

As long as we keep scoring.

Bc


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - JohnR34231 - 11-19-2016

It's come down to what team can break the other one's serve.


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - BostonCard - 11-19-2016

A turnover right about now would be great.

BC


Re: Stanford-ןɐɔ game thread - shinsengumi - 11-19-2016

(11-19-2016, 06:21 PM)jacketree link Wrote:Like California's jumbo better than ours.

Yea, we've only run for ~200 yards from our heavy packages today. :)