The CardBoard
Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - 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: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 (/thread-662.html)

Pages: 1 2

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - readarmy1976 - 10-30-2010

Total domination. Too bad we lost to oregon.

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - washingtonismoney - 10-30-2010

Owusu was the target on the end-of-half hail mary. Other than that, very quiet.

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - 82lsju - 10-30-2010

last time we had two conference road shutouts in the same year was 1935.

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - Farm93 - 10-30-2010

This is the best Stanford football team of my lifetime.

35-0 in the Rose Bowl
41-0 in Seattle.  Remember when even good Stanford teams could not win there.  UW was last shutout at home in 1976.  UW is not great, but they are OK.
First time ever that the team has scored 30+ in the first eight games.
And on and on.

Howell managed an interception with that cast.  Amazing!

The one bad thing?  With 15+ pro scouts on hand, there is no way that Luck is anything other than the #1 overall pick.  He looked that good tonight.

Meanwhile, C.a.l was crushed again on the road.  Riley got hurt too.  Wazzu just might be able to get that conference win next week.

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - burger - 10-30-2010

Quote:The one bad thing?  With 15+ pro scouts on hand, there is no way that Luck is anything other than the #1 overall pick.  He looked that good tonight.
Just remember that there might not be an NFL season next year.  I say a little prayer for a lockout each night before I go to sleep.

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - jayasena - 10-30-2010

Even 41-0 doesn\'t describe how lop-sided this game was! This Stanford team is very impressive when it\'s at full strength. Too bad we were missing a few key players for the Oregon game.

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - yvonne - 10-31-2010

At one point, it felt like we were getting a first down on every play.

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - ealtice - 10-31-2010

Quote:This Stanford team is very impressive when it\'s at full strength. Too bad we were missing a few key players for the Oregon game.

I agree totally.  I think one thing we can all see now is that this is still a program with one, final step to take before it becomes truly dominant:  it needs quality depth at all positions.  I think it probably has that depth at RB and TE, maybe at LB (and if the current group of verbals all come to Stanford, and play as advertised, those positions will REALLY be set), and we are on our way to developing depth at the OL, but we really need more quality depth everywhere else.  If Harbaugh stays around and keeps recruiting as he has, this program will be truly awesome in the next few years, even when Andrew Luck is off starring in the NFL.  Wilkerson showed some real flashes of just how good he is going to be in the future tonight, don\'t you think?  On some of his carries he looked like the best RB in a Stanford uniform, combining power and speed, and as great as Luck is, Harbaugh is developing a program really based on power running and solid defense.  The future is indeed bright.

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - CrazedZooChimp - 10-31-2010

Quote:
Quote:The one bad thing?  With 15+ pro scouts on hand, there is no way that Luck is anything other than the #1 overall pick.  He looked that good tonight.
Just remember that there might not be an NFL season next year.  I say a little prayer for a lockout each night before I go to sleep.

Amen, pray for a strike (plus I\'ll probably be happier not watching the Niners).

Today\'s game was awesome, and it re-inspires hope that Stanford could actually run the table.  

He didn\'t say that, oh Gods of Woofing... - Redrum - 10-31-2010

...he didn\'t actually say the evil spell " Run the table."   He didn\'t.  No way.  You mis-heard.  OK?

The ease with which we beat UDub was a surprise to me.  They had shown the ability to play close enough to teams that they could scare them or, in the case of USC,  beat them at the end.   But,  they have been a very up/down team.   I take away that we can beat those kind of teams and so far, our only loss tells me that we can\'t play with teams that are good and fast.   Everyone was SO obsessed with the supposed murderer\'s row after Sac State that we were supposed to be cruising by now.   Both Arizona and Ore. St. seem like they will be very tough games.  

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - dabigv13 - 10-31-2010

I didn\'t think Luck showed anything special for the NFL scouts. It was a great performance to be certain, but he\'s not going to be scrambling like that against NFL defenses, and he rarely took shots downfield tonight. The great majority of his throws were targeted within 10 yards of the line of scrimmage, and on his deep throws I would say he missed on more than he hit - the Whalen shot downfield 1-1 that was underthrown, the Reuland flag play that he plain missed, and a Baldwin post that was completed but required the receiver to go to ground rather than stay on his feet and gain more yardage.

Perhaps we\'re not taking the downfield shots as often this year because we simply don\'t need to, or maybe Owusu still is not up to 100%, but I\'ve seen fewer truly impressive Andrew Luck bombs this year than last. Those perfectly lofted fly routes that fall into the arms of a streaking receiver or the 20 yard flag lasers have been less frequent this year and seem less frequently completed when attempted.

Also, when is Loukas gonna attempt a pass? Again we had to burn a timeout when he couldn\'t get a play off. Really concerned what would happen to our offense if Luck were to miss any appreciable time.

Re: He didn\'t say that, oh Gods of Woofing... - yvonne - 10-31-2010

Quote:...he didn\'t actually say the evil spell " Run the table."   He didn\'t.  No way.  You mis-heard.  OK?

Run the table = win the next football game.

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - Farm93 - 10-31-2010

Quote:I didn\'t think Luck showed anything special for the NFL scouts. ... The great majority of his throws were targeted within 10 yards of the line of scrimmage, and on his deep throws I would say he missed on more than he hit - the Whalen shot downfield 1-1 that was underthrown, the Reuland flag play that he plain missed, and a Baldwin post that was completed but required the receiver to go to ground rather than stay on his feet and gain more yardage.

What?!  I think this shows just how spoiled we have become.  Locker, widely considered a top 10 OVERALL pick looked like a chump on the same field.  Bad throws?  Must be the rain.  Bad reads?  Stanford blitzes did not give him time and/or the guys were not on the same page.  I am not kidding, replay the game coverage and you will hear those excuses.

Meanwhile Luck, now widely considered the number #1 pick overall was 19/26 in the rain and wind on the road at Husky Stadium.  The INT was a totally unnecessary coach\'s request.  So realistically Luck was 19 of 25.  NFL Pro scouts want to see 60+%.  Luck is often tossing above 70% this year, and there have been a few days at 80+%.

The scouts know Luck can throw deep.  They know Luck can read coverages and change the play on the line.  The numbers show he is accurate long, medium and short.  He is elusive enough.  He can read defenses.  And he can even look off safeties.  The deep throw was not necessary last night.  With the weather and team injuries at WR the deep stuff just was not there.  In many ways, his appeal was likely enhanced by not insisting on demanding a deep throw in a game that didn\'t need it.

The TEs are open, and are clearly the team\'s strength.  Why insist on tossing to a covered WR 25 yards down the field when the TE is open 15 yards away?

Arm, accuracy & decision making = first overall pick

Does anyone really think an NFL draft analyst is going to move him down on the board after a 41-0 beating on the road against the #2 QB?

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - washingtonismoney - 10-31-2010

Arizona doesn\'t just look like a tough game: I still think they beat us.

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - jayasena - 10-31-2010

Quote:Also, when is Loukas gonna attempt a pass? Again we had to burn a timeout when he couldn\'t get a play off. Really concerned what would happen to our offense if Luck were to miss any appreciable time.

I was concerned about that too. Not going to complain too much after 41-0, but it would have been nice to see Loukas come in a bit earlier when the game was clearly in hand.

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - yvonne - 10-31-2010

Anybody who thinks 41-0 was about Luck didn\'t see the running game that I saw. Offensively, the game was about three things: TWU.

Re: He didn\'t say that, oh Gods of Woofing... - CrazedZooChimp - 10-31-2010

Quote:...he didn\'t actually say the evil spell " Run the table."   He didn\'t.  No way.  You mis-heard.  OK?

The ease with which we beat UDub was a surprise to me.  They had shown the ability to play close enough to teams that they could scare them or, in the case of USC,  beat them at the end.   But,  they have been a very up/down team.   I take away that we can beat those kind of teams and so far, our only loss tells me that we can\'t play with teams that are good and fast.   Everyone was SO obsessed with the supposed murderer\'s row after Sac State that we were supposed to be cruising by now.   Both Arizona and Ore. St. seem like they will be very tough games.  

EUTM dictates bowing to no program, including the program of superstition  ;)

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - Card Fan in OR - 10-31-2010

Quote:Arizona doesn\'t just look like a tough game: I still think they beat us.

Maybe, but our guys looked superb yesterday. Given my own concerns about the high/low UW team, I read an analysis on SIdotcom yesterday morning and thought we\'d be lucky to come away with a victory. This looked like our best game of the year to me, and it came after several efforts that had me very worried about our defense.

Arizona is good. We\'re good--very good. At home, there is no reason we cannot win. That doesn\'t mean I don\'/t worry. I worry every week, but it sure is fun.

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - washingtonismoney - 10-31-2010

I\'m just worried because so much of our dominance against UW was based on our dominance of both sides of the lines of scrimmage. We should be fine when we have the ball but surely Arizona\'s OL is orders of magnitude better than UW\'s hastily-cobbled together effort.

Re: Final: Stanford 41, Washington 0 - jayasena - 10-31-2010

Quote:Locker, widely considered a top 10 OVERALL pick looked like a chump on the same field.

Not to take anything away from Luck, but in fairness to Locker, we don\'t know if he was truly near 100%. Even if he felt fine at the start of the game the hits he took early and often could easily have aggravated prior injuries.