The CardBoard
Everyone sucked - 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: Everyone sucked (/thread-3721.html)


Everyone sucked - washingtonismoney - 09-02-2012

Which team is are these two quotes about?:

"[blank]'s offense great on first two drives, then disappeared. The scripted plays looked fantastic early. Once it was just a physical battle. ...[blank] showed lots of reasons for concern. That effort won't get more than 6-7 wins."

[blank], in this case, is UW. (From Bob Condotta's twitter--https://twitter.com/bcondotta/status/242133320471805952) .

UW wasn't alone in struggling against a supposedly inferior opponent. kal, of course, we know about. Allegedly these are our closest competitors in the North. In the South, Arizona went to overtime against Toledo. Wazzou didn't play a cupcake in BYU, but struggled mightily. Colorado lost to Colorado State. ASU blew out their cupcake, as expected. UCLA had a blowout score, but looked weak on defense and special teams. Only SC and Oregon looked as dominant as they should've in their opening efforts.

And yet lackluster efforts weren't just confined to the Pac-12. Wisconsin only beat Northern Iowa by 5. Iowa lost to Northern Illinois. Oklahoma ended up beating UTEP by 17, but were only leading by 3 after 3 quarters. Florida beat Bowling Green by 13 but was only up 3 after 3 quarters (causing Florida fans to call for firing the coaches after halftime). (EDIT: Number 10 Arkansas gave up 21 points in the first half to Jacksonville State.)

The conclusion is that tons of people sucked, aside from--of the games I watched--Alabama, SC, Oregon. I remember someone writing before the season began that this looked like another 2007-esque crazy season. With all the weak efforts in the first week, perhaps this theory is accurate. At any rate, unusually sloppy execution appears to be closer to the norm than the exception. So I suspect Shaw has a lot of company among his befuddled coaching peers. We don't seem to be an exception to the trend, despite the Luck hoopla; the question is, whether we can get exceptional coaching--or close--to improve execution.

Re: Everyone sucked - socalstanfan1 - 09-02-2012

nitpicking here, but Iowa narrowly defeated NIU, 18-17.  But the point is still supporte of course.

Re: Everyone sucked - Farm93 - 09-02-2012

For many of those closer games the motivation and perspective differences explain so much.

The difference between a 3 & 4 star talent going to a big program and 2 star talent going to a non-AQ school is not really that significant.  That true talent gap has probably been shrinking for some time now.

The big program hosts seem to view the games as a way to work out a few things before the all important conference season begins.  The players are excited about starting, but know they will be facing a weak OOC opponent.  And the big time coach is concerned about the hypothetical upset, but is much more concerned about revealing too much of the playbook to future conference opponents and keeping key players healthy.

The bitter 2 star filled team has a very different agenda.  For many, they will not play in front of 70-100K fans again, even if they get to a bowl game.  THIS then is the biggest game of the year for them.  They want to show the world that they were really 3 or 4 star talent and were overlooked.  In some cases, the desire to prove their worth may even include situations with the staff on the big program sideline.  If the 2 star athlete scores a touchdown in this game, that highlight will be on ESPN.  And IF the team wins they will get far more press than they would after winning in a pre-Christmas bowl game.  Oh, and the coach?  If the coach wins, or gets close, then he can begin planning to take his current $250K-$500K salary up to $1.25+ million in the next year or two.

So while the big program is literally trying not to overlook their first opponent, the little program has likely seen this as a very important opportunity for several months.  And yet, for the best teams their home field advantage and elite NFL talent should still carry the day.  Those big programs that barely escaped were probably not in the BCS bowl mix.  (Stanford)  And those that lost are probably going to see another little program team in a pre-Christmas bowl game.  (UCB).

Re: Everyone sucked - oman - 09-02-2012

We would have beaten Savannah State 63-7.

Re: Everyone sucked - pcgoode - 09-02-2012

WIM, I think what you've said puts things into perspective quite nicely.  Stanford isn't likely to challenge for a National Championship this year, but I don't think that should be too much of a surprise to anyone.  Given where everyone else is, can we reasonably expect a good season, including victories over Cal, Washington and Notre Dame?  I think the answer is still yes, provided that we improve as we should over the next few weeks.  A run at a National Championship is much more plausible in 2013 or 2014.

Re: Everyone sucked - JohnR34231 - 09-02-2012

I don't see any reason to significantly adjust our projected 8-4 record yet.

We may not beat U$C or Oregon, but nobody expected us to in the first place. Kal and Washington, two of our maybe games, sure didn't look like worldbeaters yesterday. USB back there will be a tough game, but a loss wouldn't be devastating if we can beat the Bares and the Huskies.

So, as I said before, a little early to push the panic button (unless of course someone enjoys doing that).

Re: Everyone sucked - OutsiderFan - 09-02-2012

And, even the University of South Central and Oregon have some unflattering things about their performances.

the University of South Central gave up 20 first downs to Hawaii and allowed 7-16 3rd down conversions.  the University of South Central had 20 firsts as well, but was only 4-14 on 3rd down.  the University of South Central only ran for 81 yards and a very unimpressive 3.5 YPC.

Oregon gave up 34 points and over 500 yards to Arkansas State. 

But, honestly, when you lead 50-3 with 7 mins left in the 2nd quarter, there really isn't much to criticize.

Still, Alabama held Michigan to less offensive production than U.S.C. did Hawaii and was physically dominating.  Alabama is the best team in FBS right now.

Re: Everyone sucked - fullmetal - 09-02-2012

Oregon was subbing in the second-teamers in the second quarter, I hear.  Not sure when U$C started the parade of inevitability.

Re: Everyone sucked - OutsiderFan - 09-02-2012

(09-02-2012, 05:59 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:Not sure when U$C started the parade of inevitability.

They don't have much depth to sub much.

Re: Everyone sucked - washingtonismoney - 09-02-2012

Saban hiring UW's offensive coordinator was brilliant. The last thing college football needed was Saban deciding he wanted to get elite on offense, too.

Oregon used, I heard, 70 players yesterday and were up 50-0 in the second quarter. While I'm sure they're not exactly pleased with the defensive performance, it's understandable. SC's running game didn't look so hot, you're right, but those wide receivers...does it even matter? Still, the execution problems they had were more run-of-the-mill stuff, whereas Stanford's performance was plainly more troubling. Hopefully Shaw turns this around quickly, if only because I'd rather not go through every Stanford board/publication and read mass hysterics.

Re: Everyone sucked - washingtonismoney - 09-03-2012

Speaking of "everyone sucks," some people may find the themes of this Wisconsin-Northern Iowa breakdown resonant: http://www.buckys5thquarter.com/2012/9/3/3287686/stats-and-charts-wisconsin-26-northern-iowa-21

Re: Everyone sucked - Spiny_Norman - 09-03-2012

SI's Stewart Mandel (a Bay Area resident so he may have been at the game) says that Stanford fans have more reason to panic than Cal fans after Week 1.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/stewart_mandel/09/02/week-1-panic-meter-oklahoma-florida/index.html