The CardBoard
On what front? - 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: On what front? (/thread-23490.html)


On what front? - OutsiderFan - 09-25-2022

To those of you who are die hards, follow and still watch Stanford Football in its current state, is there any front on which to feel good about the program?

RE: On what front? - Phogge - 09-25-2022

There's the Western Front and the Eastern Front. Not so good on the Northern Front so far.

RE: On what front? - M T - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 09:14 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  To those of you who are die hards, follow and still watch Stanford Football in its current state, is there any front on which to feel good about the program?

Feeling aggressive, are you?

Afaik, the players are intelligent, hard working young men.  I think the coaches, staff, and players are people that the University and fans can be proud of.

That can also be said of most opponents but maybe not all.

It is perhaps unfortunate that on the football field, they are not beating up on their opponents in the way that you wish, but fortunately  life is not a football season. 

I wonder whether you would be happier if Stanford threw in the towel on football — if the team isn’t ranked then it isn’t worth it.  I don’t know that Stanford is ready to do that for you. So perhaps you might just give up on Stanford football and invest your emotions in some other team, whether it be some other Stanford team, or some other football team.

RE: On what front? - cardcrimson - 09-25-2022

MT. Seriously, stop pulling your punches. How do you really feel?

RE: On what front? - Phogge - 09-25-2022

OF, Cal has an excellent secondary, a very good QB who doesn't seem to make mistakes like Garbers did, an electric freshman RB and a head coach who values experienced coordinators.

They will go to a bowl, perhaps a very good one.

Now that's a team to root for.

I'll stay with Stanford even with its program acne, self abuse of the new rules and a coach who is comfortable with mediocrity and gets pissed off when anyone criticizes his generalship of his fiefdom.

RE: On what front? - JohnR34231 - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 12:13 PM)M T Wrote:  
(09-25-2022, 09:14 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  To those of you who are die hards, follow and still watch Stanford Football in its current state, is there any front on which to feel good about the program?

Feeling aggressive, are you?

Afaik, the players are intelligent, hard working young men.  I think the coaches, staff, and players are people that the University and fans can be proud of.

That can also be said of most opponents but maybe not all.

It is perhaps unfortunate that on the football field, they are not beating up on their opponents in the way that you wish, but fortunately  life is not a football season. 

I wonder whether you would be happier if Stanford threw in the towel on football — if the team isn’t ranked then it isn’t worth it.  I don’t know that Stanford is ready to do that for you. So perhaps you might just give up on Stanford football and invest your emotions in some other team, whether it be some other Stanford team, or some other football team.

I don't think anyone is particularly upset about Stanford not "beating up" on the teams they play. What they are expecting is for them to be somewhat competitive, which we haven't been lately.
That's not asking too much. Is it?

RE: On what front? - Maple Leaf - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 01:05 PM)Phogge Wrote:  OF, Cal has an excellent secondary, a very good QB who doesn't seem to make mistakes like Garbers did, an electric freshman RB and a head coach who values experienced coordinators.

They will go to a bowl, perhaps a very good one.

Now that's a team to root for.

I'll stay with Stanford even with its program acne, self abuse of the new rules and a coach who is comfortable with mediocrity and gets pissed off when anyone criticizes his generalship of his fiefdom.


One of Carl's two th coaches is Terrance Brown, former Stanford cb.

RE: On what front? - gailtate - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 01:16 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote:  
(09-25-2022, 12:13 PM)M T Wrote:  
(09-25-2022, 09:14 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  To those of you who are die hards, follow and still watch Stanford Football in its current state, is there any front on which to feel good about the program?

Feeling aggressive, are you?

Afaik, the players are intelligent, hard working young men.  I think the coaches, staff, and players are people that the University and fans can be proud of.

That can also be said of most opponents but maybe not all.

It is perhaps unfortunate that on the football field, they are not beating up on their opponents in the way that you wish, but fortunately  life is not a football season. 

I wonder whether you would be happier if Stanford threw in the towel on football — if the team isn’t ranked then it isn’t worth it.  I don’t know that Stanford is ready to do that for you. So perhaps you might just give up on Stanford football and invest your emotions in some other team, whether it be some other Stanford team, or some other football team.

I don't think anyone is particularly upset about Stanford not "beating up" on the teams they play. What they are expecting is for them to be somewhat competitive, which we haven't been lately.
That's not asking too much. Is it?

I sure as hell don't think it is. I think it is altogether fitting and proper and appropriate to be exasperated right now. And bitterly disappointed in this coach and his purported "boss", who shows no inclination whatsoever to do anything beyond the academic-bureaucratic norm of getting along by going along. Certainly not showing anything near the leadership of his predecessor AD. "Stanford football" at this moment, on this coach's watch, has deteriorated into an oxymoron. Having failed to replenish the inheritance that he rode to the top, he has since then presided over the more recent decisions and choices that have his teams in the doldrums. Asking too much? Stanford University now asks too much -- of its benefactors. And WAY too much of casual fans, who are evidently voting with their feet these days to not put their butts in those tell-tale empty seats.

RE: On what front? - Goose - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 01:05 PM)Phogge Wrote:  OF, Cal has an excellent secondary, a very good QB who doesn't seem to make mistakes like Garbers did, an electric freshman RB and a head coach who values experienced coordinators.



They will go to a bowl, perhaps a very good one.

Phogge, I was at the Cal-Arizona game and I didn't at all see what you saw. Cal's QB is not an accurate passer, and especially not when pressured. Their RB is a very good football player, but he plays behind an OL that isn't nearly as good as he is. Arizona was winning the game at the half and had all the momentum. What actually happened is what often happens with Wilcox's teams. They made adjustment to the DEFENSE at the half and that defense, which Arizona had been gashing, gave up NOTHING in the third quarter. That was the game.

Arizona is a lot like Stanford. They have some talent on offense and can score some points. However, their defense is terrible (much worse than Stanford, believe it or not) and their DL is nonexistent. They attempt to play a 3-4 but many times in the second half they were in a 2 down lineman mode (sound familiar?) and on perhaps 5 plays had ONE down lineman. Arizona has to win a track meet, which for the first half, they were. Cal's big mistake was the one teams sometimes make against Stanford. Cal should have kept running until Arizona stopped them. For some reason they didn't do that in the first half. In the second half they did. End of story. Arizona then had no pass rush either because they were desperate to stop the run. They also were cheating the linebackers up which left a lot of open space over the middle of the field. Also, FWIW the last Cal touchdown was in garbage time where Cal was just going to pound the ball. Arizona had 10 men on the LOS by the time the ball was snapped. Get by the first guy and you are gone.

So, I didn't see the Cal team you describe. I see a team that was better than Arizona, but not one that looked real impressive. Middle of the road, maybe 7 wins. They have 3 now. They will beat Colorado for sure. Their other opportunities are UCLA and Stanford. Win those and they are 6-6. Who else do they beat? Maybe WSU?

RE: On what front? - Row80Critic - 09-25-2022

(09-25-2022, 09:14 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  To those of you who are die hards, follow and still watch Stanford Football in its current state, is there any front on which to feel good about the program?

Absolutely, I feel the quality and value of the Colossal Dog has steadily improved.  It holds its own against higher-priced dogs at other venues.

RE: On what front? - winflop - 09-25-2022

The only fronts I'm feeling good about are ones that involve an entirely new coaching staff.
(09-25-2022, 06:29 PM)Row80Critic Wrote:  
(09-25-2022, 09:14 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  To those of you who are die hards, follow and still watch Stanford Football in its current state, is there any front on which to feel good about the program?

Absolutely, I feel the quality and value of the Colossal Dog has steadily improved.  It holds its own against higher-priced dogs at other venues.

News flash - Costco hasn't changed their quarter-pound hot dog in ages LOLOLOL

RE: On what front? - Goose - 10-01-2022

(09-25-2022, 05:27 PM)Goose Wrote:  
(09-25-2022, 01:05 PM)Phogge Wrote:  OF, Cal has an excellent secondary, a very good QB who doesn't seem to make mistakes like Garbers did, an electric freshman RB and a head coach who values experienced coordinators.

They will go to a bowl, perhaps a very good one.
Phogge, I was at the Cal-Arizona game and I didn't at all see what you saw. Cal's QB is not an accurate passer, and especially not when pressured. Their RB is a very good football player, but he plays behind an OL that isn't nearly as good as he is. Arizona was winning the game at the half and had all the momentum. What actually happened is what often happens with Wilcox's teams. They made adjustment to the DEFENSE at the half and that defense, which Arizona had been gashing, gave up NOTHING in the third quarter. That was the game.

Arizona is a lot like Stanford. They have some talent on offense and can score some points. However, their defense is terrible (much worse than Stanford, believe it or not) and their DL is nonexistent. They attempt to play a 3-4 but many times in the second half they were in a 2 down lineman mode (sound familiar?) and on perhaps 5 plays had ONE down lineman. Arizona has to win a track meet, which for the first half, they were. Cal's big mistake was the one teams sometimes make against Stanford. Cal should have kept running until Arizona stopped them. For some reason they didn't do that in the first half. In the second half they did. End of story. Arizona then had no pass rush either because they were desperate to stop the run. They also were cheating the linebackers up which left a lot of open space over the middle of the field. Also, FWIW the last Cal touchdown was in garbage time where Cal was just going to pound the ball. Arizona had 10 men on the LOS by the time the ball was snapped. Get by the first guy and you are gone.

So, I didn't see the Cal team you describe. I see a team that was better than Arizona, but not one that looked real impressive. Middle of the road, maybe 7 wins. They have 3 now. They will beat Colorado for sure. Their other opportunities are UCLA and Stanford. Win those and they are 6-6. Who else do they beat? Maybe WSU?
Well, it won't be WSU. They really need to steal one now to be even a 7 win team.