09-28-2016, 07:23 AM
Rose Bowl Winners 23
Rose Bowl Criminals 20
Rose Bowl Criminals 20
Stanford @ Washington predictions
Alma mater of Jim Plunkett - 27
Alma mater of Sonny Sixkiller - 17
*I may have gotten auto-corrected in my original post. Back in the day, when Sixkiller was in his prime, he was very impressive. I didn't intentionally disrespect him by mistyping "Sorry". The game between those teams that year was awesome. Does the auto-correct operate on Dikes [sic], Sunny [sic] or either?
Alma mater of Sonny Sixkiller - 17
*I may have gotten auto-corrected in my original post. Back in the day, when Sixkiller was in his prime, he was very impressive. I didn't intentionally disrespect him by mistyping "Sorry". The game between those teams that year was awesome. Does the auto-correct operate on Dikes [sic], Sunny [sic] or either?
"It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you think you know that just isn't so."
Mark Twain
Alma mater of Jim Plunkett - 27
Alma mater of Sonny Sixkiller - 17
*I may have gotten auto-corrected in my original post. Back in the day, when Sixkiller was in his prime, he was very impressive. I didn't intentionally disrespect him by mistyping "Sorry". The game between those teams that year was awesome. Does the auto-correct operate on Dikes [sic], Sunny [sic] or either?
Alma mater of Sonny Sixkiller - 17
*I may have gotten auto-corrected in my original post. Back in the day, when Sixkiller was in his prime, he was very impressive. I didn't intentionally disrespect him by mistyping "Sorry". The game between those teams that year was awesome. Does the auto-correct operate on Dikes [sic], Sunny [sic] or either?
"It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you think you know that just isn't so."
Mark Twain
Alma mater of Jim Plunkett - 27
Alma mater of Sonny Sixkiller - 17
*I may have gotten auto-corrected in my original post. Back in the day, when Sixkiller was in his prime, he was very impressive. I didn't intentionally disrespect him by mistyping "Sorry". The game between those teams that year was awesome. Does the auto-correct operate on Dikes [sic], Sunny [sic] or either?
Alma mater of Sonny Sixkiller - 17
*I may have gotten auto-corrected in my original post. Back in the day, when Sixkiller was in his prime, he was very impressive. I didn't intentionally disrespect him by mistyping "Sorry". The game between those teams that year was awesome. Does the auto-correct operate on Dikes [sic], Sunny [sic] or either?
"It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you think you know that just isn't so."
Mark Twain
Alma mater of Jim Plunkett - 27
Alma mater of Sonny Sixkiller - 17
*I may have gotten auto-corrected in my original post. Back in the day, when Sixkiller was in his prime, he was very impressive. I didn't intentionally disrespect him by mistyping "Sorry". The game between those teams that year was awesome. Does the auto-correct operate on Dikes [sic], Sunny [sic] or either?
Alma mater of Sonny Sixkiller - 17
*I may have gotten auto-corrected in my original post. Back in the day, when Sixkiller was in his prime, he was very impressive. I didn't intentionally disrespect him by mistyping "Sorry". The game between those teams that year was awesome. Does the auto-correct operate on Dikes [sic], Sunny [sic] or either?
"It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you think you know that just isn't so."
Mark Twain
09-28-2016, 09:08 AM
I think I just entered 24-17 for Stanford, but my iPhone just powered down on me so hopefully it went through.
I had trouble coming up with this prediction. While I think I have a pretty good handle on Stanford, I can't make sense of the discrepancy between Washington's rankings and what that team has accomplished on the field going back to 2015. I would appreciate someone explaining what I am missing. They had three cream puffs in their first three games this season which they dispensed with, and then played Arizona. Their best wins are against the Wildcats this past Saturday and against USC last October.Â
I watched the Arizona game in its entirety. I came away from it thinking that their showing really didn't reflect a top 10 ranking. This was a game that the Huskies won in overtime against an unranked opponent who was missing its first string quarterback and first string running back. In addition, Arizona was missing its two best pass rushers, and playing guys on the DL who are probably smaller than Kevin Palma. The Huskies gave up 300 yards on the ground in large part because they weren't getting off blocks and tackling properly.
I don't think I need to say too much about Arizona's victory over USC given what happened soon after that game.
Our defense and special teams have looked great so far this season, and that can carry a team a long way in college football. The offense hasn't impressed me that much. I'd like to see Burns pass more and more of Love.
I had trouble coming up with this prediction. While I think I have a pretty good handle on Stanford, I can't make sense of the discrepancy between Washington's rankings and what that team has accomplished on the field going back to 2015. I would appreciate someone explaining what I am missing. They had three cream puffs in their first three games this season which they dispensed with, and then played Arizona. Their best wins are against the Wildcats this past Saturday and against USC last October.Â
I watched the Arizona game in its entirety. I came away from it thinking that their showing really didn't reflect a top 10 ranking. This was a game that the Huskies won in overtime against an unranked opponent who was missing its first string quarterback and first string running back. In addition, Arizona was missing its two best pass rushers, and playing guys on the DL who are probably smaller than Kevin Palma. The Huskies gave up 300 yards on the ground in large part because they weren't getting off blocks and tackling properly.
I don't think I need to say too much about Arizona's victory over USC given what happened soon after that game.
Our defense and special teams have looked great so far this season, and that can carry a team a long way in college football. The offense hasn't impressed me that much. I'd like to see Burns pass more and more of Love.
I think I just entered 24-17 for Stanford, but my iPhone just powered down on me so hopefully it went through.
I had trouble coming up with this prediction. While I think I have a pretty good handle on Stanford, I can't make sense of the discrepancy between Washington's rankings and what that team has accomplished on the field going back to 2015. I would appreciate someone explaining what I am missing. They had three cream puffs in their first three games this season which they dispensed with, and then played Arizona. Their best wins are against the Wildcats this past Saturday and against USC last October.Â
I watched the Arizona game in its entirety. I came away from it thinking that their showing really didn't reflect a top 10 ranking. This was a game that the Huskies won in overtime against an unranked opponent who was missing its first string quarterback and first string running back. In addition, Arizona was missing its two best pass rushers, and playing guys on the DL who are probably smaller than Kevin Palma. The Huskies gave up 300 yards on the ground in large part because they weren't getting off blocks and tackling properly.
I don't think I need to say too much about Arizona's victory over USC given what happened soon after that game.
Our defense and special teams have looked great so far this season, and that can carry a team a long way in college football. The offense hasn't impressed me that much. I'd like to see Burns pass more and more of Love.
I had trouble coming up with this prediction. While I think I have a pretty good handle on Stanford, I can't make sense of the discrepancy between Washington's rankings and what that team has accomplished on the field going back to 2015. I would appreciate someone explaining what I am missing. They had three cream puffs in their first three games this season which they dispensed with, and then played Arizona. Their best wins are against the Wildcats this past Saturday and against USC last October.Â
I watched the Arizona game in its entirety. I came away from it thinking that their showing really didn't reflect a top 10 ranking. This was a game that the Huskies won in overtime against an unranked opponent who was missing its first string quarterback and first string running back. In addition, Arizona was missing its two best pass rushers, and playing guys on the DL who are probably smaller than Kevin Palma. The Huskies gave up 300 yards on the ground in large part because they weren't getting off blocks and tackling properly.
I don't think I need to say too much about Arizona's victory over USC given what happened soon after that game.
Our defense and special teams have looked great so far this season, and that can carry a team a long way in college football. The offense hasn't impressed me that much. I'd like to see Burns pass more and more of Love.
09-28-2016, 09:08 AM
I think I just entered 24-17 for Stanford, but my iPhone just powered down on me so hopefully it went through.
I had trouble coming up with this prediction. While I think I have a pretty good handle on Stanford, I can't make sense of the discrepancy between Washington's rankings and what that team has accomplished on the field going back to 2015. I would appreciate someone explaining what I am missing. They had three cream puffs in their first three games this season which they dispensed with, and then played Arizona. Their best wins are against the Wildcats this past Saturday and against USC last October.Â
I watched the Arizona game in its entirety. I came away from it thinking that their showing really didn't reflect a top 10 ranking. This was a game that the Huskies won in overtime against an unranked opponent who was missing its first string quarterback and first string running back. In addition, Arizona was missing its two best pass rushers, and playing guys on the DL who are probably smaller than Kevin Palma. The Huskies gave up 300 yards on the ground in large part because they weren't getting off blocks and tackling properly.
I don't think I need to say too much about Arizona's victory over USC given what happened soon after that game.
Our defense and special teams have looked great so far this season, and that can carry a team a long way in college football. The offense hasn't impressed me that much. I'd like to see Burns pass more and more of Love.
I had trouble coming up with this prediction. While I think I have a pretty good handle on Stanford, I can't make sense of the discrepancy between Washington's rankings and what that team has accomplished on the field going back to 2015. I would appreciate someone explaining what I am missing. They had three cream puffs in their first three games this season which they dispensed with, and then played Arizona. Their best wins are against the Wildcats this past Saturday and against USC last October.Â
I watched the Arizona game in its entirety. I came away from it thinking that their showing really didn't reflect a top 10 ranking. This was a game that the Huskies won in overtime against an unranked opponent who was missing its first string quarterback and first string running back. In addition, Arizona was missing its two best pass rushers, and playing guys on the DL who are probably smaller than Kevin Palma. The Huskies gave up 300 yards on the ground in large part because they weren't getting off blocks and tackling properly.
I don't think I need to say too much about Arizona's victory over USC given what happened soon after that game.
Our defense and special teams have looked great so far this season, and that can carry a team a long way in college football. The offense hasn't impressed me that much. I'd like to see Burns pass more and more of Love.
I think I just entered 24-17 for Stanford, but my iPhone just powered down on me so hopefully it went through.
I had trouble coming up with this prediction. While I think I have a pretty good handle on Stanford, I can't make sense of the discrepancy between Washington's rankings and what that team has accomplished on the field going back to 2015. I would appreciate someone explaining what I am missing. They had three cream puffs in their first three games this season which they dispensed with, and then played Arizona. Their best wins are against the Wildcats this past Saturday and against USC last October.Â
I watched the Arizona game in its entirety. I came away from it thinking that their showing really didn't reflect a top 10 ranking. This was a game that the Huskies won in overtime against an unranked opponent who was missing its first string quarterback and first string running back. In addition, Arizona was missing its two best pass rushers, and playing guys on the DL who are probably smaller than Kevin Palma. The Huskies gave up 300 yards on the ground in large part because they weren't getting off blocks and tackling properly.
I don't think I need to say too much about Arizona's victory over USC given what happened soon after that game.
Our defense and special teams have looked great so far this season, and that can carry a team a long way in college football. The offense hasn't impressed me that much. I'd like to see Burns pass more and more of Love.
I had trouble coming up with this prediction. While I think I have a pretty good handle on Stanford, I can't make sense of the discrepancy between Washington's rankings and what that team has accomplished on the field going back to 2015. I would appreciate someone explaining what I am missing. They had three cream puffs in their first three games this season which they dispensed with, and then played Arizona. Their best wins are against the Wildcats this past Saturday and against USC last October.Â
I watched the Arizona game in its entirety. I came away from it thinking that their showing really didn't reflect a top 10 ranking. This was a game that the Huskies won in overtime against an unranked opponent who was missing its first string quarterback and first string running back. In addition, Arizona was missing its two best pass rushers, and playing guys on the DL who are probably smaller than Kevin Palma. The Huskies gave up 300 yards on the ground in large part because they weren't getting off blocks and tackling properly.
I don't think I need to say too much about Arizona's victory over USC given what happened soon after that game.
Our defense and special teams have looked great so far this season, and that can carry a team a long way in college football. The offense hasn't impressed me that much. I'd like to see Burns pass more and more of Love.
09-28-2016, 09:15 AM
(09-28-2016, 09:08 AM)pcgoode link Wrote:While I think I have a pretty good handle on Stanford, I can't make sense of the discrepancy between Washington's rankings and what that team has accomplished on the field going back to 2015. I would appreciate someone explaining what I am missing. They had three cream puffs in their first three games this season which they dispensed with, and then played Arizona. Their best wins are against the Wildcats this past Saturday and against USC last October.
1) They had a pretty good defense last year (and IIRC the year before), and while they lost some key pieces in the front seven people expected that to continue.
2) Browning put up good numbers as a true freshman and people projected improvement for him. (Also of note, he was injured and missed our game last year.)
3) They have some very good skill players.
That got the pre-season ranking, and since they've mostly done what ranked teams are supposed to do (beat the teams they're playing) they haven't slid much. Someone on reddit made a post yesterday about the biggest ranking discrepancies between human and computer polls, and UW was one of the most overranked by humans, because those things listed above aren't as indicative of future success as people think.
All of that being said, they're still a good team, probably deserving of being top-20. We're playing at their house, one of the loudest stadiums in the country, on a short week with the some key players injured and an inexperienced OL and QB. There's a reason we're 3-point underdogs.
(09-28-2016, 09:08 AM)pcgoode link Wrote:While I think I have a pretty good handle on Stanford, I can't make sense of the discrepancy between Washington's rankings and what that team has accomplished on the field going back to 2015. I would appreciate someone explaining what I am missing. They had three cream puffs in their first three games this season which they dispensed with, and then played Arizona. Their best wins are against the Wildcats this past Saturday and against USC last October.
1) They had a pretty good defense last year (and IIRC the year before), and while they lost some key pieces in the front seven people expected that to continue.
2) Browning put up good numbers as a true freshman and people projected improvement for him. (Also of note, he was injured and missed our game last year.)
3) They have some very good skill players.
That got the pre-season ranking, and since they've mostly done what ranked teams are supposed to do (beat the teams they're playing) they haven't slid much. Someone on reddit made a post yesterday about the biggest ranking discrepancies between human and computer polls, and UW was one of the most overranked by humans, because those things listed above aren't as indicative of future success as people think.
All of that being said, they're still a good team, probably deserving of being top-20. We're playing at their house, one of the loudest stadiums in the country, on a short week with the some key players injured and an inexperienced OL and QB. There's a reason we're 3-point underdogs.
09-28-2016, 09:15 AM
(09-28-2016, 09:08 AM)pcgoode link Wrote:While I think I have a pretty good handle on Stanford, I can't make sense of the discrepancy between Washington's rankings and what that team has accomplished on the field going back to 2015. I would appreciate someone explaining what I am missing. They had three cream puffs in their first three games this season which they dispensed with, and then played Arizona. Their best wins are against the Wildcats this past Saturday and against USC last October.
1) They had a pretty good defense last year (and IIRC the year before), and while they lost some key pieces in the front seven people expected that to continue.
2) Browning put up good numbers as a true freshman and people projected improvement for him. (Also of note, he was injured and missed our game last year.)
3) They have some very good skill players.
That got the pre-season ranking, and since they've mostly done what ranked teams are supposed to do (beat the teams they're playing) they haven't slid much. Someone on reddit made a post yesterday about the biggest ranking discrepancies between human and computer polls, and UW was one of the most overranked by humans, because those things listed above aren't as indicative of future success as people think.
All of that being said, they're still a good team, probably deserving of being top-20. We're playing at their house, one of the loudest stadiums in the country, on a short week with the some key players injured and an inexperienced OL and QB. There's a reason we're 3-point underdogs.
(09-28-2016, 09:08 AM)pcgoode link Wrote:While I think I have a pretty good handle on Stanford, I can't make sense of the discrepancy between Washington's rankings and what that team has accomplished on the field going back to 2015. I would appreciate someone explaining what I am missing. They had three cream puffs in their first three games this season which they dispensed with, and then played Arizona. Their best wins are against the Wildcats this past Saturday and against USC last October.
1) They had a pretty good defense last year (and IIRC the year before), and while they lost some key pieces in the front seven people expected that to continue.
2) Browning put up good numbers as a true freshman and people projected improvement for him. (Also of note, he was injured and missed our game last year.)
3) They have some very good skill players.
That got the pre-season ranking, and since they've mostly done what ranked teams are supposed to do (beat the teams they're playing) they haven't slid much. Someone on reddit made a post yesterday about the biggest ranking discrepancies between human and computer polls, and UW was one of the most overranked by humans, because those things listed above aren't as indicative of future success as people think.
All of that being said, they're still a good team, probably deserving of being top-20. We're playing at their house, one of the loudest stadiums in the country, on a short week with the some key players injured and an inexperienced OL and QB. There's a reason we're 3-point underdogs.
09-28-2016, 09:20 AM
Offence on the rise 30
Offensive Period 3
Offensive Period 3
All models are wrong; some models are useful......
George Box
09-28-2016, 09:20 AM
Offence on the rise 30
Offensive Period 3
Offensive Period 3
All models are wrong; some models are useful......
George Box
09-28-2016, 09:33 AM
23-21, Cardinal prevail!
Nailbiter. Special teams make the difference.
Nailbiter. Special teams make the difference.
Pax et Bonum
23-21, Cardinal prevail!
Nailbiter. Special teams make the difference.
Nailbiter. Special teams make the difference.
Pax et Bonum
09-28-2016, 09:33 AM
23-21, Cardinal prevail!
Nailbiter. Special teams make the difference.
Nailbiter. Special teams make the difference.
Pax et Bonum
23-21, Cardinal prevail!
Nailbiter. Special teams make the difference.
Nailbiter. Special teams make the difference.
Pax et Bonum
09-28-2016, 09:48 AM
Cardinal 24
Dawgs 21
If it wasn't for the injuries we sustained last game, I would be more confident. However, I do believe Murphy, Alexander, and JJ A-W will rise to the occasion in their increased roles. Stanford prevails in a back-and-forth game.Â
Dawgs 21
If it wasn't for the injuries we sustained last game, I would be more confident. However, I do believe Murphy, Alexander, and JJ A-W will rise to the occasion in their increased roles. Stanford prevails in a back-and-forth game.Â
09-28-2016, 09:48 AM
Cardinal 24
Dawgs 21
If it wasn't for the injuries we sustained last game, I would be more confident. However, I do believe Murphy, Alexander, and JJ A-W will rise to the occasion in their increased roles. Stanford prevails in a back-and-forth game.Â
Dawgs 21
If it wasn't for the injuries we sustained last game, I would be more confident. However, I do believe Murphy, Alexander, and JJ A-W will rise to the occasion in their increased roles. Stanford prevails in a back-and-forth game.Â
09-28-2016, 11:37 AM
I just do not have much confidence in the UW defensive line. I also noticed their LB being out of position frequently last week.
LSJU 31
U Dub 24
LSJU 31
U Dub 24
Heroism is not defined by one great act, but by a lifetime of right action.
09-28-2016, 11:37 AM
I just do not have much confidence in the UW defensive line. I also noticed their LB being out of position frequently last week.
LSJU 31
U Dub 24
LSJU 31
U Dub 24
Heroism is not defined by one great act, but by a lifetime of right action.
09-28-2016, 11:41 AM
Stanford 33, Washington 17
Our Doog visitor goes back to sleep...
Our Doog visitor goes back to sleep...
"We should all be better." --- Bill Walton, UCLA telecast, Feb. 16, 2013
Stanford 33, Washington 17
Our Doog visitor goes back to sleep...
Our Doog visitor goes back to sleep...
"We should all be better." --- Bill Walton, UCLA telecast, Feb. 16, 2013
09-28-2016, 11:41 AM
Stanford 33, Washington 17
Our Doog visitor goes back to sleep...
Our Doog visitor goes back to sleep...
"We should all be better." --- Bill Walton, UCLA telecast, Feb. 16, 2013
Stanford 33, Washington 17
Our Doog visitor goes back to sleep...
Our Doog visitor goes back to sleep...
"We should all be better." --- Bill Walton, UCLA telecast, Feb. 16, 2013
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »