Stanford-ASU Game Thread - Printable Version

Stanford-ASU 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-ASU Game Thread (/thread-14434.html)

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

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - martyup - 09-30-2017

Despite Love's heroics and a solid performance by Costello, this was a distinctly dissatisfying win for me.Â Is it just me? Am I spoiled in the Shaw era?Â Anyone else feel less thrilled than expected after this win?

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - washingtonismoney - 09-30-2017

(09-30-2017, 05:02 PM)martyup link Wrote:Despite Love's heroics and a solid performance by Costello, this was a distinctly dissatisfying win for me.Â Is it just me? Am I spoiled in the Shaw era?Â Anyone else feel less thrilled than expected after this win?

Dissatisfying is a bit strong for me, but the performance was a bit sour. The defense played well for a half; the offense for the other half. You kind of wonder what would happen if both sides of the ball put it together simultaneously. Which hasn't happened for this team this year, with the exception of the Rice game. (which is a tiny exception...)

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - CTcard - 09-30-2017

(09-30-2017, 02:43 PM)ADPATERSON link Wrote:we only have 10 rushes.Â T E N.Â Thank God for Love!Â 17yds a carry.
We have thrown it 18 times.Â Dont remember last time we threw more than passed -- maybe 2004.

I know this was a passing comment in the heat of the game, but it seems worth pointing out that the "Stanford never passes" theme is over-done.

The last time over an entire game that Stanford called more pass plays than runs was way back on September 16, 2017. Against SDSU we had at 25 pass calls vs 18 runs.

But, that includes sacks as pass calls. The last time we actually threw more passes than runs counting sacks as runs (as the NCAA keeps statistics) was back on September 9, 2017. Against U$C we had 28 offiical pass attempts vs 26 runs. If you acknowledge sacks were pass calls then it was 30 vs 24.

Against Rice we had 37 pass vs 36 run officially, 39 vs 34 swapping sacks.

By the way, we ended this game ended up 24 pass vs 33 rush - no sacks.

Over the past few years, passing more and things go badly are highly correlated. Sometimes we've passed more because things were going badly, sometimes things went badly because we passed too much (IMO).

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - Goose - 09-30-2017

(09-30-2017, 05:02 PM)martyup link Wrote:Despite Love's heroics and a solid performance by Costello, this was a distinctly dissatisfying win for me.Â Is it just me? Am I spoiled in the Shaw era?Â Anyone else feel less thrilled than expected after this win?

+1 from me. However, I think part of that was because the offense was in "experimental" mode with Costello, Herbig didn't play, and the team as a whole played like they expected to win, i.e. not as much urgency as one would like. That led to a less-than-stellar performance in many areas, particularly on the DL. We will need to be much better against Utah. Love is truly a phenom, but he can't win games by himself (or can he? After today's performance, I am not sureÂ :) ).

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - CTcard - 09-30-2017

(09-30-2017, 05:04 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Dissatisfying is a bit strong for me, but the performance was a bit sour. The defense played well for a half; the offense for the other half. You kind of wonder what would happen if both sides of the ball put it together simultaneously. Which hasn't happened for this team this year, with the exception of the Rice game. (which is a tiny exception...)

Well, if you want a rosy take, the fact that we beat a conference foe by two scores with both offense and defense only playing a half (and without Herbig, and without Holder for a half, and without JJAW for a half) is a sign that there is potential by this team to play pretty well. Certainly it's better than if the offense and defense played their very best for the whole game and we won by 10.

Still, I am currently terrified of Utah running up the middle on us all game (despite the fact that Utah doesn't really seem to be running like Utah this year -Â 116/3.22 vs BYU, 112/2.95 vs Arizona).

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - SF_Cardinal_Fan - 09-30-2017

(09-30-2017, 05:02 PM)martyup link Wrote:Despite Love's heroics and a solid performance by Costello, this was a distinctly dissatisfying win for me.Â Is it just me? Am I spoiled in the Shaw era?Â Anyone else feel less thrilled than expected after this win?

For me , the negative part of this game was that (in the first half) ASU was able to move the ball so well against Stanford's defense.
Also in the first half, Stanford's receiver getting stripped of the ball at the goal line, after such a nice long completion by Costello, was a disappointment.

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - Hurlburt88 - 09-30-2017

I liked seeing a bit more action from Alfieri.Â Â Hopefully he can work his way into a true starting role.Â Needed with Barton out and our weekness in the middle.Â

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - CowboyIndian - 09-30-2017

We should have won by two more touchdowns...given the Schultz fumble and the Murphy facemask. Need to clean some stuff up on D, for sure (like tackling, for instance), but I was pretty heartened by this game. If we can play without those kind of mistakes, we can beat anybody, I believe.

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - magnus - 09-30-2017

The AP recap of the game has an odd mistake:

Stanford: Shaw's team has bounced back nicely after losing back-to-back games to San Diego State and Texas Tech.

Wonder where they pulled Texas Tech from.

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - CrazedZooChimp - 09-30-2017

(09-30-2017, 07:52 PM)magnus link Wrote:The AP recap of the game has an odd mistake:

Stanford: Shaw's team has bounced back nicely after losing back-to-back games to San Diego State and Texas Tech.

Wonder where they pulled Texas Tech from.

ASU had back to back losses to SDSU and TT (before beating Oregon last week).

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - BostonCard - 09-30-2017

Worth noting that although I didnt get to see the game, about 7 miles into my race at around two oclock, the DJ played All Right Now and I knew everything was going to be ok.Â Didnt make it down the mountain till after six, but my wife greeted me with the good news.

BC

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - martyup - 09-30-2017

(09-30-2017, 09:30 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Worth noting that although I didnt get to see the game, about 7 miles into my race at around two oclock, the DJ played All Right Now and I knew everything was going to be ok.Â Didnt make it down the mountain till after six, but my wife greeted me with the good news.

BC

How did you do in the spartan race?

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - BostonCard - 09-30-2017

I survived and I finished. Time sucked but I didnt care (9 hrs 15 min).Â It was a ton of fun, but will be not so fun tomorrow morning.

BC

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - martyup - 09-30-2017

(09-30-2017, 09:36 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:I survived and I finished. Time sucked but I didnt care (9 hrs 15 min).Â It was a ton of fun, but will be not so fun tomorrow morning.

BC

Good job.Â

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - BostonCard - 09-30-2017

Thanks.Â Toughest physical thing Ive ever done.

BC

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - stupac2 - 10-01-2017

(09-30-2017, 09:52 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Thanks.Â Toughest physical thing Ive ever done.

BC

I've mentioned that my brother does them, he missed that one though. Said the first time he did one he got home and just collapsed, slept for a few hours. Describing the course it seemed completely insane to me. So good job!

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - oman - 10-01-2017

(09-30-2017, 05:54 PM)CowboyIndian link Wrote:We should have won by two more touchdowns...given the Schultz fumble and the Murphy facemask. Need to clean some stuff up on D, for sure (like tackling, for instance), but I was pretty heartened by this game. If we can play without those kind of mistakes, we can beat anybody, I believe.

I'm in the camp that says that our D keeps us from beating everyone.Â Just feels like we simply don't have the muscle/speed in the front seven to deal with the top teams.

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - winflop - 10-01-2017

(09-30-2017, 05:26 PM)hurlburt88 link Wrote:I liked seeing a bit more action from Alfieri.Â Â Hopefully he can work his way into a true starting role.Â Needed with Barton out and our weekness in the middle.

One of the adjustments I noticed in the second half was more snaps for Palma & Alfieri. Unfortunately Perez still saw too many snaps as evidenced by his PI after three whiffs and being beaten badly by the TE in the first half.

I really look forward to seeing more of Alfieri he seems to have a nose for the ball but I'm not sure how he is in pass coverage.

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - Hurlburt88 - 10-01-2017

He (Alfieri) sure had that great INT against Oregon last year . . . my sense is that his change of direction is faster than Perez.Â We'll see.Â I definitely continue to believe that he "has been working through some things" and can really make an impact for us going forward.Â

Re: Stanford-ASU Game Thread - martyup - 10-01-2017

(10-01-2017, 06:11 AM)winflop link Wrote:[quote author=hurlburt88 link=topic=17543.msg203664#msg203664 date=1506817595]
I liked seeing a bit more action from Alfieri.Â Â Hopefully he can work his way into a true starting role.Â Needed with Barton out and our weekness in the middle.