09-29-2018, 10:30 PM
Where they have been badly beaten at LOS on both sides of the ball. If that doesn’t change it’s not going to be pretty.
Two weeks on a row
09-29-2018, 10:42 PM
I'm starting to think that 7-9 wins is the new norm. It's better than the Buddy/Wlat days, but I miss the Rose Bowls.
09-29-2018, 10:52 PM
(09-29-2018, 10:42 PM)yvonne Wrote: I'm starting to think that 7-9 wins is the new norm. It's better than the Buddy/Wlat days, but I miss the Rose Bowls.
I would amend this to 9-10 wins, but I agree with the sentiment. The thing is there are only 12 games in a regular season, and we play pretty quality competition in our division, and out of conference. And none of the other Pac-12 schools were ever going to let us rest on our laurels and dominate the conference unchallenged. I still think winning the Pac-12 North in 2012, 2013, 2015, and 2017, winning the Pac-12 in all of those years except last, and only one season with fewer than nine wins since 2009 is remarkable consistency. Every other team in the conference (SC, Oregon, Washington included) cannot match that sustained consistency. Their highs might be higher in case of Oregon and Washington, but we have remained at the top of the conference throughout.
(09-29-2018, 10:42 PM)yvonne Wrote: I'm starting to think that 7-9 wins is the new norm. It's better than the Buddy/Wlat days, but I miss the Rose Bowls.
I would amend this to 9-10 wins, but I agree with the sentiment. The thing is there are only 12 games in a regular season, and we play pretty quality competition in our division, and out of conference. And none of the other Pac-12 schools were ever going to let us rest on our laurels and dominate the conference unchallenged. I still think winning the Pac-12 North in 2012, 2013, 2015, and 2017, winning the Pac-12 in all of those years except last, and only one season with fewer than nine wins since 2009 is remarkable consistency. Every other team in the conference (SC, Oregon, Washington included) cannot match that sustained consistency. Their highs might be higher in case of Oregon and Washington, but we have remained at the top of the conference throughout.
09-29-2018, 11:11 PM
(09-29-2018, 10:42 PM)yvonne Wrote: I'm starting to think that 7-9 wins is the new norm. It's better than the Buddy/Wlat days, but I miss the Rose Bowls.
We just played two ranked teams on the road in a row. We have one more ranked team left on our schedule (UW) on the road as Cal will tumble out of the rankings, and maybe one ranked team at home (WSU). We should be able to win every other game (doesn’t mean we will win every game, of course), but we will need our offensive line to be better.
But gee, a 4-1 start to the season with wins over sc and Oregon is something I would take most years.
BC
(09-29-2018, 10:42 PM)yvonne Wrote: I'm starting to think that 7-9 wins is the new norm. It's better than the Buddy/Wlat days, but I miss the Rose Bowls.
We just played two ranked teams on the road in a row. We have one more ranked team left on our schedule (UW) on the road as Cal will tumble out of the rankings, and maybe one ranked team at home (WSU). We should be able to win every other game (doesn’t mean we will win every game, of course), but we will need our offensive line to be better.
But gee, a 4-1 start to the season with wins over sc and Oregon is something I would take most years.
BC
09-29-2018, 11:45 PM
If it's injuries that are affecting us...well, Shannon Turley is supposed to be the mitigation on that front. What's going on over there?
09-30-2018, 05:23 AM
(09-29-2018, 11:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(09-29-2018, 10:42 PM)yvonne Wrote: I'm starting to think that 7-9 wins is the new norm. It's better than the Buddy/Wlat days, but I miss the Rose Bowls.
We just played two ranked teams on the road in a row. We have one more ranked team left on our schedule (UW) on the road as Cal will tumble out of the rankings, and maybe one ranked team at home (WSU). We should be able to win every other game (doesn’t mean we will win every game, of course), but we will need our offensive line to be better.
But gee, a 4-1 start to the season with wins over sc and Oregon is something I would take most years.
BC
The fact is that the schedule is brutal this year (as it is most even years), and we knew that these two games would be the hardest spot in a hard schedule. To come away 1-1 is fine. We're still 2-0 in conference play with wins over 2 of the 4 toughest opponents, and unlike ND we should have multiple ranked games left to play. If we can get the OL back on track, I like our odds.
Of course, it's been 5 weeks and the OL still isn't on track, so that's worrying. But we get Utah at home and then a mini-bye before ASU, so we should have some time.
(09-29-2018, 11:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(09-29-2018, 10:42 PM)yvonne Wrote: I'm starting to think that 7-9 wins is the new norm. It's better than the Buddy/Wlat days, but I miss the Rose Bowls.
We just played two ranked teams on the road in a row. We have one more ranked team left on our schedule (UW) on the road as Cal will tumble out of the rankings, and maybe one ranked team at home (WSU). We should be able to win every other game (doesn’t mean we will win every game, of course), but we will need our offensive line to be better.
But gee, a 4-1 start to the season with wins over sc and Oregon is something I would take most years.
BC
The fact is that the schedule is brutal this year (as it is most even years), and we knew that these two games would be the hardest spot in a hard schedule. To come away 1-1 is fine. We're still 2-0 in conference play with wins over 2 of the 4 toughest opponents, and unlike ND we should have multiple ranked games left to play. If we can get the OL back on track, I like our odds.
Of course, it's been 5 weeks and the OL still isn't on track, so that's worrying. But we get Utah at home and then a mini-bye before ASU, so we should have some time.
09-30-2018, 06:24 AM
Sure, coming away 1-1 from roadies at Oregon and ND isn't bad, but not all wins and losses are the same. Stanford has been positively whipped in the trenches two weeks in a row. I can certainly quibble with game plans and play calls on both sides of the ball, but the LOS weakness Stanford showed the last two weeks is alarming to say the least.
Cal ran the ball on Oregon much more effectively than Stanford did. Now I know a lot of that was due to a running QB who put up over 100 yards rushing, but even without him, Cal's OL got more push on Oregon than Stanford's did. Stanford's OL is frankly soft. I saw some very bleak things against ND that were really alarming. The intensity with which ND's front attacked Stanford's OL was overwhelming, and not matched at all by Stanford's defense against ND's OL.
To me, the thing I just can't get away from is how unless you have dynamic WRs and and a super accurate QB, your QB simply must be able to make plays by running the ball at least to keep defenses honest, by taking off and running occasionally out of drop backs, naked bootlegs, and zone reads. This is especially the case when a RB is keyed on so much, like the Stanford RB is.
After watching Oregon and Notre Dame play yesterday, man would that be a great match-up to see this season.
Cal ran the ball on Oregon much more effectively than Stanford did. Now I know a lot of that was due to a running QB who put up over 100 yards rushing, but even without him, Cal's OL got more push on Oregon than Stanford's did. Stanford's OL is frankly soft. I saw some very bleak things against ND that were really alarming. The intensity with which ND's front attacked Stanford's OL was overwhelming, and not matched at all by Stanford's defense against ND's OL.
To me, the thing I just can't get away from is how unless you have dynamic WRs and and a super accurate QB, your QB simply must be able to make plays by running the ball at least to keep defenses honest, by taking off and running occasionally out of drop backs, naked bootlegs, and zone reads. This is especially the case when a RB is keyed on so much, like the Stanford RB is.
After watching Oregon and Notre Dame play yesterday, man would that be a great match-up to see this season.
Sure, coming away 1-1 from roadies at Oregon and ND isn't bad, but not all wins and losses are the same. Stanford has been positively whipped in the trenches two weeks in a row. I can certainly quibble with game plans and play calls on both sides of the ball, but the LOS weakness Stanford showed the last two weeks is alarming to say the least.
Cal ran the ball on Oregon much more effectively than Stanford did. Now I know a lot of that was due to a running QB who put up over 100 yards rushing, but even without him, Cal's OL got more push on Oregon than Stanford's did. Stanford's OL is frankly soft. I saw some very bleak things against ND that were really alarming. The intensity with which ND's front attacked Stanford's OL was overwhelming, and not matched at all by Stanford's defense against ND's OL.
To me, the thing I just can't get away from is how unless you have dynamic WRs and and a super accurate QB, your QB simply must be able to make plays by running the ball at least to keep defenses honest, by taking off and running occasionally out of drop backs, naked bootlegs, and zone reads. This is especially the case when a RB is keyed on so much, like the Stanford RB is.
After watching Oregon and Notre Dame play yesterday, man would that be a great match-up to see this season.
Cal ran the ball on Oregon much more effectively than Stanford did. Now I know a lot of that was due to a running QB who put up over 100 yards rushing, but even without him, Cal's OL got more push on Oregon than Stanford's did. Stanford's OL is frankly soft. I saw some very bleak things against ND that were really alarming. The intensity with which ND's front attacked Stanford's OL was overwhelming, and not matched at all by Stanford's defense against ND's OL.
To me, the thing I just can't get away from is how unless you have dynamic WRs and and a super accurate QB, your QB simply must be able to make plays by running the ball at least to keep defenses honest, by taking off and running occasionally out of drop backs, naked bootlegs, and zone reads. This is especially the case when a RB is keyed on so much, like the Stanford RB is.
After watching Oregon and Notre Dame play yesterday, man would that be a great match-up to see this season.
09-30-2018, 09:34 AM
(09-29-2018, 11:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: We just played two ranked teams on the road in a row. We have one more ranked team left on our schedule (UW) on the road as Cal will tumble out of the rankings, and maybe one ranked team at home (WSU). We should be able to win every other game (doesn’t mean we will win every game, of course), but we will need our offensive line to be better.Totally agree, especially because the loss does nothing to our PAC-12 chances. What matters now is how we go forward. A week ago, we were "great", now we "suck". What we were, doesn't matter. What we do going ahead does. It has been said that there are two "gimmies" on our schedule. I remember OSU from last year. Imagine the Chipster needing a victory to avoid an 0-12. There are no gimmies ahead. OTOH, none of the teams we will be playing, except UW, have exceptional teams in the same class as ND. We can still win the PAC-12. We can also lose any of the remaining games. The OL needs to play better. If it doesn't, all the remedies proposed on this board matter very little.
But gee, a 4-1 start to the season with wins over sc and Oregon is something I would take most years.
BC
(09-29-2018, 11:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: We just played two ranked teams on the road in a row. We have one more ranked team left on our schedule (UW) on the road as Cal will tumble out of the rankings, and maybe one ranked team at home (WSU). We should be able to win every other game (doesn’t mean we will win every game, of course), but we will need our offensive line to be better.Totally agree, especially because the loss does nothing to our PAC-12 chances. What matters now is how we go forward. A week ago, we were "great", now we "suck". What we were, doesn't matter. What we do going ahead does. It has been said that there are two "gimmies" on our schedule. I remember OSU from last year. Imagine the Chipster needing a victory to avoid an 0-12. There are no gimmies ahead. OTOH, none of the teams we will be playing, except UW, have exceptional teams in the same class as ND. We can still win the PAC-12. We can also lose any of the remaining games. The OL needs to play better. If it doesn't, all the remedies proposed on this board matter very little.
But gee, a 4-1 start to the season with wins over sc and Oregon is something I would take most years.
BC
09-30-2018, 02:41 PM
It’s football. Injuries are inevitable. I don’t think Turley all of a sudden became a lousy strength and conditioning coach.
(09-29-2018, 11:45 PM)fullmetal Wrote: If it's injuries that are affecting us...well, Shannon Turley is supposed to be the mitigation on that front. What's going on over there?
It’s football. Injuries are inevitable. I don’t think Turley all of a sudden became a lousy strength and conditioning coach.
(09-29-2018, 11:45 PM)fullmetal Wrote: If it's injuries that are affecting us...well, Shannon Turley is supposed to be the mitigation on that front. What's going on over there?
09-30-2018, 07:23 PM
Two weeks ago the Patriots lost a game to the Jaguars where they were whipped up front most of the game, had their chances late, but couldn't pull it out. Last week they got utterly embarrassed by the hapless Lions. Doom and gloom. Everyone was freaking out.
This week they completely destroy the previously undefeated Dolphins by dominating both lines of scrimmage.
My point? This stuff can change fast, even inside the season. Sometimes it takes time. Sometimes you need to have that really bad to really concentrate the mind, see what's wrong, and fix it.
Besides, I think the narrative on here is wrong. We went toe-to-toe with ND in the first half, and if it weren't for drops we might've even gone into the half with a decent lead. The problem was that ND's DL took over in the 4th quarter and we couldn't move the ball at all. But it was tight for 3 quarters, we just didn't finish. Is that fixable? I dunno, but I'm not ready to bury this team yet.
This week they completely destroy the previously undefeated Dolphins by dominating both lines of scrimmage.
My point? This stuff can change fast, even inside the season. Sometimes it takes time. Sometimes you need to have that really bad to really concentrate the mind, see what's wrong, and fix it.
Besides, I think the narrative on here is wrong. We went toe-to-toe with ND in the first half, and if it weren't for drops we might've even gone into the half with a decent lead. The problem was that ND's DL took over in the 4th quarter and we couldn't move the ball at all. But it was tight for 3 quarters, we just didn't finish. Is that fixable? I dunno, but I'm not ready to bury this team yet.
Two weeks ago the Patriots lost a game to the Jaguars where they were whipped up front most of the game, had their chances late, but couldn't pull it out. Last week they got utterly embarrassed by the hapless Lions. Doom and gloom. Everyone was freaking out.
This week they completely destroy the previously undefeated Dolphins by dominating both lines of scrimmage.
My point? This stuff can change fast, even inside the season. Sometimes it takes time. Sometimes you need to have that really bad to really concentrate the mind, see what's wrong, and fix it.
Besides, I think the narrative on here is wrong. We went toe-to-toe with ND in the first half, and if it weren't for drops we might've even gone into the half with a decent lead. The problem was that ND's DL took over in the 4th quarter and we couldn't move the ball at all. But it was tight for 3 quarters, we just didn't finish. Is that fixable? I dunno, but I'm not ready to bury this team yet.
This week they completely destroy the previously undefeated Dolphins by dominating both lines of scrimmage.
My point? This stuff can change fast, even inside the season. Sometimes it takes time. Sometimes you need to have that really bad to really concentrate the mind, see what's wrong, and fix it.
Besides, I think the narrative on here is wrong. We went toe-to-toe with ND in the first half, and if it weren't for drops we might've even gone into the half with a decent lead. The problem was that ND's DL took over in the 4th quarter and we couldn't move the ball at all. But it was tight for 3 quarters, we just didn't finish. Is that fixable? I dunno, but I'm not ready to bury this team yet.
09-30-2018, 08:54 PM
(09-30-2018, 09:34 AM)Goose Wrote:(09-29-2018, 11:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: We just played two ranked teams on the road in a row. We have one more ranked team left on our schedule (UW) on the road as Cal will tumble out of the rankings, and maybe one ranked team at home (WSU). We should be able to win every other game (doesn’t mean we will win every game, of course), but we will need our offensive line to be better.Totally agree, especially because the loss does nothing to our PAC-12 chances. What matters now is how we go forward. A week ago, we were "great", now we "suck". What we were, doesn't matter. What we do going ahead does. It has been said that there are two "gimmies" on our schedule. I remember OSU from last year. Imagine the Chipster needing a victory to avoid an 0-12. There are no gimmies ahead. OTOH, none of the teams we will be playing, except UW, have exceptional teams in the same class as ND. We can still win the PAC-12. We can also lose any of the remaining games. The OL needs to play better. If it doesn't, all the remedies proposed on this board matter very little.
But gee, a 4-1 start to the season with wins over sc and Oregon is something I would take most years.
BC
Disagree we were "great" a week ago. We were one bad snap away from a Notre Dame like final score. I'll say lucky, but at this point in the season I have not seen anything better than adequate.
(09-30-2018, 09:34 AM)Goose Wrote:(09-29-2018, 11:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: We just played two ranked teams on the road in a row. We have one more ranked team left on our schedule (UW) on the road as Cal will tumble out of the rankings, and maybe one ranked team at home (WSU). We should be able to win every other game (doesn’t mean we will win every game, of course), but we will need our offensive line to be better.Totally agree, especially because the loss does nothing to our PAC-12 chances. What matters now is how we go forward. A week ago, we were "great", now we "suck". What we were, doesn't matter. What we do going ahead does. It has been said that there are two "gimmies" on our schedule. I remember OSU from last year. Imagine the Chipster needing a victory to avoid an 0-12. There are no gimmies ahead. OTOH, none of the teams we will be playing, except UW, have exceptional teams in the same class as ND. We can still win the PAC-12. We can also lose any of the remaining games. The OL needs to play better. If it doesn't, all the remedies proposed on this board matter very little.
But gee, a 4-1 start to the season with wins over sc and Oregon is something I would take most years.
BC
Disagree we were "great" a week ago. We were one bad snap away from a Notre Dame like final score. I'll say lucky, but at this point in the season I have not seen anything better than adequate.
09-30-2018, 09:38 PM
(09-30-2018, 08:54 PM)Beeg_Dawg Wrote:(09-30-2018, 09:34 AM)Goose Wrote:(09-29-2018, 11:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: We just played two ranked teams on the road in a row. We have one more ranked team left on our schedule (UW) on the road as Cal will tumble out of the rankings, and maybe one ranked team at home (WSU). We should be able to win every other game (doesn’t mean we will win every game, of course), but we will need our offensive line to be better.Totally agree, especially because the loss does nothing to our PAC-12 chances. What matters now is how we go forward. A week ago, we were "great", now we "suck". What we were, doesn't matter. What we do going ahead does. It has been said that there are two "gimmies" on our schedule. I remember OSU from last year. Imagine the Chipster needing a victory to avoid an 0-12. There are no gimmies ahead. OTOH, none of the teams we will be playing, except UW, have exceptional teams in the same class as ND. We can still win the PAC-12. We can also lose any of the remaining games. The OL needs to play better. If it doesn't, all the remedies proposed on this board matter very little.
But gee, a 4-1 start to the season with wins over sc and Oregon is something I would take most years.
BC
Disagree we were "great" a week ago. We were one bad snap away from a Notre Dame like final score. I'll say lucky, but at this point in the season I have not seen anything better than adequate.
Even taking out Oregon, SC and SDSU are hardly pushovers, and we won both those games fairly handily.
BC
(09-30-2018, 08:54 PM)Beeg_Dawg Wrote:(09-30-2018, 09:34 AM)Goose Wrote:(09-29-2018, 11:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: We just played two ranked teams on the road in a row. We have one more ranked team left on our schedule (UW) on the road as Cal will tumble out of the rankings, and maybe one ranked team at home (WSU). We should be able to win every other game (doesn’t mean we will win every game, of course), but we will need our offensive line to be better.Totally agree, especially because the loss does nothing to our PAC-12 chances. What matters now is how we go forward. A week ago, we were "great", now we "suck". What we were, doesn't matter. What we do going ahead does. It has been said that there are two "gimmies" on our schedule. I remember OSU from last year. Imagine the Chipster needing a victory to avoid an 0-12. There are no gimmies ahead. OTOH, none of the teams we will be playing, except UW, have exceptional teams in the same class as ND. We can still win the PAC-12. We can also lose any of the remaining games. The OL needs to play better. If it doesn't, all the remedies proposed on this board matter very little.
But gee, a 4-1 start to the season with wins over sc and Oregon is something I would take most years.
BC
Disagree we were "great" a week ago. We were one bad snap away from a Notre Dame like final score. I'll say lucky, but at this point in the season I have not seen anything better than adequate.
Even taking out Oregon, SC and SDSU are hardly pushovers, and we won both those games fairly handily.
BC
10-01-2018, 08:36 AM
(09-30-2018, 09:38 PM)BostonCard Wrote:That is why my "great" and "suck" were in quotes. I think neither is/was accurate. We probably rate a very solid good, which is where we are ranked right now. Are we capable of being better than that? I think coach Shaw would say that yes we could be. Unfortunately, our OL right now is holding us back. If they were playing close to the pre-season expectations, we would be much better. However, our record may still have been the same. ND played much better with their new QB, and we didn't have a way to stop them completely. We needed more offense and we especially needed more ball control under those circumstances. We are fortunate to still have the opportunity to reach a higher level and go to a NY6 game. We just have no more margin for error.(09-30-2018, 08:54 PM)Beeg_Dawg Wrote:(09-30-2018, 09:34 AM)Goose Wrote:(09-29-2018, 11:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: We just played two ranked teams on the road in a row. We have one more ranked team left on our schedule (UW) on the road as Cal will tumble out of the rankings, and maybe one ranked team at home (WSU). We should be able to win every other game (doesn’t mean we will win every game, of course), but we will need our offensive line to be better.Totally agree, especially because the loss does nothing to our PAC-12 chances. What matters now is how we go forward. A week ago, we were "great", now we "suck". What we were, doesn't matter. What we do going ahead does. It has been said that there are two "gimmies" on our schedule. I remember OSU from last year. Imagine the Chipster needing a victory to avoid an 0-12. There are no gimmies ahead. OTOH, none of the teams we will be playing, except UW, have exceptional teams in the same class as ND. We can still win the PAC-12. We can also lose any of the remaining games. The OL needs to play better. If it doesn't, all the remedies proposed on this board matter very little.
But gee, a 4-1 start to the season with wins over sc and Oregon is something I would take most years.
BC
Disagree we were "great" a week ago. We were one bad snap away from a Notre Dame like final score. I'll say lucky, but at this point in the season I have not seen anything better than adequate.
Even taking out Oregon, SC and SDSU are hardly pushovers, and we won both those games fairly handily.
BC
(09-30-2018, 09:38 PM)BostonCard Wrote:That is why my "great" and "suck" were in quotes. I think neither is/was accurate. We probably rate a very solid good, which is where we are ranked right now. Are we capable of being better than that? I think coach Shaw would say that yes we could be. Unfortunately, our OL right now is holding us back. If they were playing close to the pre-season expectations, we would be much better. However, our record may still have been the same. ND played much better with their new QB, and we didn't have a way to stop them completely. We needed more offense and we especially needed more ball control under those circumstances. We are fortunate to still have the opportunity to reach a higher level and go to a NY6 game. We just have no more margin for error.(09-30-2018, 08:54 PM)Beeg_Dawg Wrote:(09-30-2018, 09:34 AM)Goose Wrote:(09-29-2018, 11:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: We just played two ranked teams on the road in a row. We have one more ranked team left on our schedule (UW) on the road as Cal will tumble out of the rankings, and maybe one ranked team at home (WSU). We should be able to win every other game (doesn’t mean we will win every game, of course), but we will need our offensive line to be better.Totally agree, especially because the loss does nothing to our PAC-12 chances. What matters now is how we go forward. A week ago, we were "great", now we "suck". What we were, doesn't matter. What we do going ahead does. It has been said that there are two "gimmies" on our schedule. I remember OSU from last year. Imagine the Chipster needing a victory to avoid an 0-12. There are no gimmies ahead. OTOH, none of the teams we will be playing, except UW, have exceptional teams in the same class as ND. We can still win the PAC-12. We can also lose any of the remaining games. The OL needs to play better. If it doesn't, all the remedies proposed on this board matter very little.
But gee, a 4-1 start to the season with wins over sc and Oregon is something I would take most years.
BC
Disagree we were "great" a week ago. We were one bad snap away from a Notre Dame like final score. I'll say lucky, but at this point in the season I have not seen anything better than adequate.
Even taking out Oregon, SC and SDSU are hardly pushovers, and we won both those games fairly handily.
BC
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »