The CardBoard
ND-Stanford - 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: ND-Stanford (/thread-7900.html)

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

Re: ND-Stanford - NDIrish - 10-01-2014

(10-01-2014, 03:36 AM)Irish Jacky link Wrote:This is for NDIrish:

Get off your f**king knees, man! 

You're a masochistic embarrassment. 

I picture you as the wimpy English public school student, pants down and bent over, asking the sadistic pedophile "head" master with the cane:  "MAY I HAVE ANOTHER, SIR?".

You are being lampooned and made the fool here by a bunch of limp-wristed poseurs and you seem to be enjoying it.

The hole is deep enough.  Stop digging and find some self-respect!

Oh, and an afterthought for all the simps here:  you're going to be exposed on Saturday.  It's not really going to be that close.  We'll win by at least 10 and probably more like 14.

Whatever man, you dont like what i am posting and have to say that don't read it. Me and you, both chose to come to this Stanford board, so are you saying im not an ND fan if i dont come on here and start talking crap and saying foolish things like "we are gonna blow you out" or "you guys suck", yeah because i have so much proof from ND's history to back up the claim.  I am a brobdingnagian ND fan, but i am also realistic that odds are, this is going to be a close game, and should be a fun one to watch.  If it is a blow out, great and this is possible, but unlikely.

On a second note, im not sure why you spend time picturing an english public school student with his pants down getting whipped, but thats probably something you need to work out.

"The hole" that you are referring to, was dug by a few of us that got off topic and we have gotten things back on now.  The rest of the people on here seem to enjoy a little discussion with a few jabs in there. 

Go Irish!

Re: ND-Stanford - NDIrish - 10-01-2014

So anyway, i know a lot has been said about how great Stanfords Defense is, but that focus seems to mainly be on the front Seven.  ND has a great group of receivers.  My question is, did you guys limit USC due to good corner coverage, or QB pressure?  If golson has time or can scramble, do you think you guys can hang with our receivers?  We have a variety of options that give us speed and height

Re: ND-Stanford - Irish Jacky - 10-01-2014

(10-01-2014, 05:37 AM)NDIrish link Wrote:[quote author=Irish Jacky link=topic=10754.msg100062#msg100062 date=1412159771]


Whatever man, you dont like what i am posting and have to say that don't read it. Me and you, both chose to come to this Stanford board, so are you saying im not an ND fan if i dont come on here and start talking crap and saying foolish things like "we are gonna blow you out" or "you guys suck", yeah because i have so much proof from ND's history to back up the claim. 

....

No, I'm simply saying you're acting like a masochist.  You may be an ND fan but you're not representing us well at all.  I would prefer that you cease and desist.  I'm not a Michingan-like troglodyte.  I loathe the type.  But I don't like doormats either, particularly when they are representing our common fan community poorly in hostile territory  As one honest poster here contributed this morning, visiting fans of opponents can't have meaningful discussions about upcoming games because of the nature of fans and the zeitgeist of forums like this.

Unlike you, I came here basically to read and not post.  I was moved to post by what I view as your lack of spine and what appears to me your obliviousness to being used by the homers here.  'Nuff said.

Re: ND-Stanford - NDIrish - 10-01-2014

(10-01-2014, 05:57 AM)Irish Jacky link Wrote:[quote author=NDIrish link=topic=10754.msg100072#msg100072 date=1412167068]
[quote author=Irish Jacky link=topic=10754.msg100062#msg100062 date=1412159771]


Whatever man, you dont like what i am posting and have to say that don't read it. Me and you, both chose to come to this Stanford board, so are you saying im not an ND fan if i dont come on here and start talking crap and saying foolish things like "we are gonna blow you out" or "you guys suck", yeah because i have so much proof from ND's history to back up the claim. 

....

No, I'm simply saying you're acting like a masochist.  You may be an ND fan but you're not representing us well at all.  I would prefer that you cease and desist.  I'm not a Michingan-like troglodyte.  I loathe the type.  But I don't like doormats either, particularly when they are representing our common fan community poorly in hostile territory  As one honest poster here contributed this morning, visiting fans of opponents can't have meaningful discussions about upcoming games because of the nature of fans and the zeitgeist of forums like this.

Unlike you, I came here basically to read and not post.  I was moved to post by what I view as your lack of spine and what appears to me your obliviousness to being used by the homers here.  'Nuff said.
[/quote]

lol ok, so me posting here means so much for the ND community and will change the perspective of so many people!  The nerve of me to come here and apologize for using inappropriate language, or for saying i respect an opponent, or hey sorry if something came out wrong, this is your house and ill play by your rules!  That totally makes me doormat.  And i came here to read and not post, but decided to post to get more info on stanford because i haven't been able to watch them this year and correct some info about ND.

So let me enter this "hostile" territory with my armor on  never being able to admit when i am wrong!  How dare anyone question the University of Notre Dame!  How dare i sit by and allow someone to say that Teo made ND look foolish, or that there is a chance we can lose to an opponent!  But hey, way to pull out the one "honest" poster, and ignore the 10 others who said they are ok with me being here. 

Yes if you read through all of them, the comments got ridiculous, and i could have sat here and argued and argued until next years game, or, i could have apologized, played along the rules, and get back to the important matter, how big the game is for both teams!  I believe, and based off of previous comments from certain posters, fans can go across boards and have meaningful chats and throw out predictions and my player is better than your player kind of stuff and have it be ok and still "represent the common fan community"  (Because i am sure so many people here know that i speak for at least 54% of the ND community)  This happened at the michigan game, sat by 2 MU fans, and it was a blast discussing teams before the game and throwing it back and forth during.

Relax man,

Re: ND-Stanford - SeattleTree - 10-01-2014

(10-01-2014, 05:39 AM)NDIrish link Wrote:So anyway, i know a lot has been said about how great Stanfords Defense is, but that focus seems to mainly be on the front Seven.  ND has a great group of receivers.  My question is, did you guys limit U$€ due to good corner coverage, or QB pressure?  If golson has time or can scramble, do you think you guys can hang with our receivers?  We have a variety of options that give us speed and height

Stanford's front 7 has been a pleasant surprise so far this season.  Parry (the starting NT) and Anderson (starting DE) are both healthier than they've been in quite some time and are both beasts.  The defensive line has developed some depth, as has the linebacking corps, with Kalambayi a star in the making.  But the defensive backfield is, as expected, the strength of this team.  I'd be questioning whether Golson will have time or be able to scramble and whether Notre Dame's receivers can get open against Stanford's defense (and, if they can get open, whether they can get any yards after the catch), rather than asking whether Stanford's defense can hang with ND's receivers.  They can.  Ask USC's receivers who are a better group than Notre Dame's. 

Re: ND-Stanford - NDIrish - 10-01-2014

(10-01-2014, 07:53 AM)SeattleTree link Wrote:[quote author=NDIrish link=topic=10754.msg100073#msg100073 date=1412167188]
So anyway, i know a lot has been said about how great Stanfords Defense is, but that focus seems to mainly be on the front Seven.  ND has a great group of receivers.  My question is, did you guys limit U$€ due to good corner coverage, or QB pressure?  If golson has time or can scramble, do you think you guys can hang with our receivers?  We have a variety of options that give us speed and height

Stanford's front 7 has been a pleasant surprise so far this season.  Parry (the starting NT) and Anderson (starting DE) are both healthier than they've been in quite some time and are both beasts.  The defensive line has developed some depth, as has the linebacking corps, with Kalambayi a star in the making.  But the defensive backfield is, as expected, the strength of this team.  I'd be questioning whether Golson will have time or be able to scramble and whether the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends's receivers can get open against Stanford's defense (and, if they can get open, whether they can get any yards after the catch), rather than asking whether Stanford's defense can hang with ND's receivers.  They can.  Ask U$€'s receivers who are a better group than the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends's.
[/quote]

ND's group of receivers are better the USCs, we have better variety and depth.  But its nice to hear we at least have strength vs. strength

Re: ND-Stanford - CowboyIndian - 10-01-2014

(10-01-2014, 05:57 AM)Irish Jacky link Wrote:and the zeitgeist of forums like this.

I do not think this word means whatever you think it means.

Re: ND-Stanford - Leftcoast - 10-01-2014

You will have a hard time convincing anyone not wearing green and wearing an embroidered shamrock that N. Dame's receivers are better than SoCal's.

Receiver is not a position where moderately talented depth beats top end talent and SC is stacked at the top.  The school has had 20 wide receivers drafted in the past 25 years (second only to Miami's 21) and will extend that streak when the current crop graduates according to mock drafts by experts. Agholar may be the best in college ball and first or second off the board.

Depth?  Everyone is deep but it is your top three who more often than not make the game deciding plays.  Your top three guys may be good.  The NFL thinks SoCal's guys are better.

Re: ND-Stanford - Hulk01 - 10-01-2014

I don't quite get the wide receiver talk here.  Mongomery goes early, and Corey Robinson might to, when his year comes up.  The scouts aren't wild about anyone else but he thinks Cajuste probably go in a late round.  "NFL DBs are getting bigger and longer, so his height isn't as appealing as it is in a college WR.  But he's remarkably fast and tough."

Both teams TEs (Koyack and Hooper), however, are good bets to go in the first four rounds.

My scout has Agholor in the middle of the second round. His first round WR that we will see is Jaelen Strong for ASU  (Well, no kidding.) Williams for the Huskies could go in the second or third.

It's not the skill positions of these teams that the scouts are looking at--other than Montgomery in the first 40 guys.  It's the offensive linemen, linebackers, and safeties.  My guy says that Richards, Lyons (at safety), and Whitfield ("wait'll he learns the position" are possible to likely first day picks, along with Redfield for the Irish.  "And the scouts will be all over the linebackers in this game: Kalambayi and Vaughters, Grace and Smith. The game is showcase for those four."

Re: ND-Stanford - NDIrish - 10-01-2014

(10-01-2014, 09:08 AM)Hulk01 link Wrote:I don't quite get the wide receiver talk here.  Mongomery goes early, and Corey Robinson might to, when his year comes up.  The scouts aren't wild about anyone else but he thinks Cajuste probably go in a late round.  "NFL DBs are getting bigger and longer, so his height isn't as appealing as it is in a college WR.  But he's remarkably fast and tough."

Both teams TEs (Koyack and Hooper), however, are good bets to go in the first four rounds.

My scout has Agholor in the middle of the second round. His first round WR that we will see is Jaelen Strong for ASU  (Well, no kidding.) Williams for the Huskies could go in the second or third.

It's not the skill positions of these teams that the scouts are looking at--other than Montgomery in the first 40 guys.  It's the offensive linemen, linebackers, and safeties.  My guy says that Richards, Lyons (at safety), and Whitfield ("wait'll he learns the position" are possible to likely first day picks, along with Redfield for the Irish.  "And the scouts will be all over the linebackers in this game: Kalambayi and Vaughters, Grace and Smith. The game is showcase for those four."

unsure if grace will player.  Smith is the best linebacker on the field. Vaughters the 2nd

Re: ND-Stanford - NDIrish - 10-01-2014

(10-01-2014, 09:08 AM)Hulk01 link Wrote:I don't quite get the wide receiver talk here.  Mongomery goes early, and Corey Robinson might to, when his year comes up.  The scouts aren't wild about anyone else but he thinks Cajuste probably go in a late round.  "NFL DBs are getting bigger and longer, so his height isn't as appealing as it is in a college WR.  But he's remarkably fast and tough."

Both teams TEs (Koyack and Hooper), however, are good bets to go in the first four rounds.

My scout has Agholor in the middle of the second round. His first round WR that we will see is Jaelen Strong for ASU  (Well, no kidding.) Williams for the Huskies could go in the second or third.

It's not the skill positions of these teams that the scouts are looking at--other than Montgomery in the first 40 guys.  It's the offensive linemen, linebackers, and safeties.  My guy says that Richards, Lyons (at safety), and Whitfield ("wait'll he learns the position" are possible to likely first day picks, along with Redfield for the Irish.  "And the scouts will be all over the linebackers in this game: Kalambayi and Vaughters, Grace and Smith. The game is showcase for those four."

right now koyack would be drafted maybe in the last 3

Redfield is a couple years away, but maybe

Re: ND-Stanford - FarmBoy - 10-01-2014

Quote:unsure if grace will player.  Smith is the best linebacker on the field. Vaughters the 2nd

Is there a single position where you would concede Stanford has the best player on the field Saturday? You sound like  typical homer believing so strongly that ND receivers are better than 'SC, LBs are better than Stanford, coach is better than Stanford, QB is better than Stanford, blah blah blah. I mean, have you really watched that much of Vaughters to even be able to judge?

Re: ND-Stanford - NDIrish - 10-01-2014

(10-01-2014, 08:44 AM)leftcoast link Wrote:You will have a hard time convincing anyone not wearing green and wearing an embroidered shamrock that N. Dame's receivers are better than SoCal's.

Receiver is not a position where moderately talented depth beats top end talent and SC is stacked at the top.  The school has had 20 wide receivers drafted in the past 25 years (second only to Miami's 21) and will extend that streak when the current crop graduates according to mock drafts by experts. Agholar may be the best in college ball and first or second off the board.

Depth?  Everyone is deep but it is your top three who more often than not make the game deciding plays.  Your top three guys may be good.  The NFL thinks SoCal's guys are better.

As a group, they are.  Agholar is better than ours, but they are rated above "moderately", more likely very good. And they are just getting started.  Alot of them are young guys in there with a lot of speed. And golson hits them all.

Re: ND-Stanford - NDIrish - 10-01-2014

(10-01-2014, 09:43 AM)FarmBoy link Wrote:
Quote:unsure if grace will player.  Smith is the best linebacker on the field. Vaughters the 2nd

Is there a single position where you would concede Stanford has the best player on the field Saturday? You sound like  typical homer believing so strongly that ND receivers are better than 'SC, LBs are better than Stanford, coach is better than Stanford, QB is better than Stanford, blah blah blah. I mean, have you really watched that much of Vaughters to even be able to judge?


Yes there are plenty of positions that stanford is better than ND on, i can list them out for you if you want?

1. on both sides of the ball stanford is better on the line, without a doubt, we may have 2 guys combined that would start for stanford. 

2. At linebacker, other then Smith, stanford has better linebackers (but smith is the best linebacker on that field, and probably the best athlete)

3. TE -probably a wash

4. DBs - from what i have read on here, especially with russel out, Stanford has better corners, especially right now, hard to say what they will develop into.

BUT
at QB and RB and receiver ND is better



Re: ND-Stanford - OutsiderFan - 10-01-2014

(10-01-2014, 10:20 AM)NDIrish link Wrote:... at QB and RB and receiver the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends is better

I said it earlier and will again.  The QB being better is only relative to how he plays against a given defense.  Given Stanford's is one of the best in the country, and Golson hasn't faced a good pass defense yet, it's a little presumptuous to claim Golson is the better QB in this particular game.  That is what matters when assessing a match-up. 

It's entirely possible Golson will be better, but to say so now is whistling past the graveyard a bit.  Stanford's RBs and WRs haven't been very explosive, but that applies to the whole offense.  Stanford's WR talent is on par with ND's, but given it hasn't produced, it's fair to say ND's are better.  The same probably does go for the RBs as well.

Stanford is better at:  DL, LB, DB, and OL
ND is better at: WR and RB

Golson and Hogan are question marks, and TEs are probably even

Stanford has a great kick return and coverage game, but terrible FG kicking.  Not sure how the ND ST are.





Re: ND-Stanford - FarmBoy - 10-01-2014

Quote:1. on both sides of the ball stanford is better on the line, without a doubt, we may have 2 guys combined that would start for stanford. 

If this is true, how can you reconcile that with your prediction of ND winning? I hear a general rule of thumb that the better team up front is going to typically win the game. If Stanford's OL is better than ND's DL, that gives time to throw and lanes to run. If Stanford's DL is better than ND's OL, then Golson gets sacked and the RB's don't get into space. How does ND win?

Re: ND-Stanford - NDIrish - 10-01-2014

(10-01-2014, 10:36 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:[quote author=NDIrish link=topic=10754.msg100126#msg100126 date=1412184042]
... at QB and RB and receiver the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends is better

I said it earlier and will again.  The QB being better is only relative to how he plays against a given defense.  Given Stanford's is one of the best in the country, and Golson hasn't faced a good pass defense yet, it's a little presumptuous to claim Golson is the better QB in this particular game.  That is what matters when assessing a match-up. 

It's entirely possible Golson will be better, but to say so now is whistling past the graveyard a bit.  Stanford's RBs and WRs haven't been very explosive, but that applies to the whole offense.  Stanford's WR talent is on par with ND's, but given it hasn't produced, it's fair to say ND's are better.  The same probably does go for the RBs as well.

Stanford is better at:  DL, LB, DB, and OL
ND is better at: WR and RB

Golson and Hogan are question marks, and TEs are probably even

Stanford has a great kick return and coverage game, but terrible FG kicking.  Not sure how the ND ST are.
[/quote]


our kicker has got a good leg, we have decent returns, but our blocking on punt returns are inconsistent, but our kickoff return is decent

Re: ND-Stanford - NDIrish - 10-01-2014

(10-01-2014, 10:41 AM)FarmBoy link Wrote:
Quote:1. on both sides of the ball stanford is better on the line, without a doubt, we may have 2 guys combined that would start for stanford. 

If this is true, how can you reconcile that with your prediction of ND winning? I hear a general rule of thumb that the better team up front is going to typically win the game. If Stanford's OL is better than ND's DL, that gives time to throw and lanes to run. If Stanford's DL is better than ND's OL, then Golson gets sacked and the RB's don't get into space. How does ND win?

Because i dont think golson gets sacked all that much, he is very good at extending plays and avoiding defenders.  So that takes away some of the advantage of stanfords D line being better than nds.  In general thats a good rule, but the term better doesn't define the difference in skill.  So even though a teams D line is better than another teams D line, that doesnt specify if they are just 10% better of 80% better. 

Overall, i think golson can naturalize alot of the difference and (even though i get slammed for this) i think NDs WRs are better, so with golson buying time, the receivers get open and make plans.

So that is how i can still say ND wins.

Re: ND-Stanford - FarmBoy - 10-01-2014

Quote:i think NDs WRs are better

Better than what? Better than our WR's? If so, that doesn't matter, since they don't play against each other. Better than our DB's? Do you have any data on which to base that assessment? It doesn't sound like you even know who our DB's are (including Alex Carter, son of Tom Carter).

Re: ND-Stanford - Papa John - 10-01-2014

IMO, through its first four games, Stanford's four greatest weaknesses are:
1. Red zone inefficiency
2. Turnover margin
3. FG kicking
4. Drive-killing (on offense) and drive-sustaining (on defense) penalties.

At UW, Stanford's strengths--which numerous CARDBoarders have already discussed--outweighed its weaknesses and the good guys won. Will that happen in South Bend? UND is the best team that Stanford has faced, but Stanford has been improving every week and is light-years better than:
Rice, 1-3, including a loss at home to Old Dominion
UM, 2-3, including double-digit losses at home to Utah and Minnesota
Purdue, 2-3, including a loss at home to Central Michigan
Syracuse, 2-2, including a near-loss at home to Villanova

So yeah, Golson and the WRs have looked great against mediocre competition and, yeah, Stanford fans still envision the Golson who struggled two years ago. I'm sure that Golson is a better player now than then, but the Stanford team that you'll see on Saturday will also be better than the team that gave away the U*S*C game.

I'm predicting Stanford 17, ND 13.