[gailtate]

I woulda bet a bundle on the Trojans, sure that Shaw would get his head handed to him. We know how that turned out.
Vandy looked like a gimme but I was still skeptical.
I knew the matchup in the UCLA game favored the Bruins but I would have bet on Stanford to cover
Oregon? No way, no how. Woulda gotten skinned in that one, too.

This week, I'm thinking Herm's Solar Satans may take the night off, psychologically. Stanford pulls another one out of its hindquarters. Bet according to my record.

[gailtate]

I woulda bet a bundle on the Trojans, sure that Shaw would get his head handed to him. We know how that turned out.
Vandy looked like a gimme but I was still skeptical.
I knew the matchup in the UCLA game favored the Bruins but I would have bet on Stanford to cover
Oregon? No way, no how. Woulda gotten skinned in that one, too.

This week, I'm thinking Herm's Solar Satans may take the night off, psychologically. Stanford pulls another one out of its hindquarters. Bet according to my record.

[JohnR34231]

I thought if Oregon brought their "A" game we were toast, but if they didn't we had a shot.

I feel the same way about ASU.

[JohnR34231]

I thought if Oregon brought their "A" game we were toast, but if they didn't we had a shot.

I feel the same way about ASU.

[OutsiderFan]

Read my post in the predictions thread that presents clear data as to why Stanford has no chance at ASU and you might feel less sanguine.

To be fair, I initially doubted the credibility of ASU being favored by 10+, but after looking at the stats - including one common opponent in UCLA - I'm surprised the number isn't even bigger, especially considering short week road game for Stanford and ASU at home on a Friday night.

[OutsiderFan]

Read my post in the predictions thread that presents clear data as to why Stanford has no chance at ASU and you might feel less sanguine.

To be fair, I initially doubted the credibility of ASU being favored by 10+, but after looking at the stats - including one common opponent in UCLA - I'm surprised the number isn't even bigger, especially considering short week road game for Stanford and ASU at home on a Friday night.

[Phogge]

If you are so sure then cash in those shares of Apple you bought in ‘85 and put it all on the Devils.

[Phogge]

If you are so sure then cash in those shares of Apple you bought in ‘85 and put it all on the Devils.

[JohnR34231]

If we are so certain of an ASU victory maybe we should just call off the game and chalk up a win for the Sun Devils.

After all it would keep all the players safe from injury.

[JohnR34231]

If we are so certain of an ASU victory maybe we should just call off the game and chalk up a win for the Sun Devils.

After all it would keep all the players safe from injury.

[Renaissance Man]

Read my post in the predictions thread that presents clear data as to why Stanford has no chance at ASU and you might feel less sanguine.

To be fair, I initially doubted the credibility of ASU being favored by 10+, but after looking at the stats - including one common opponent in UCLA - I'm surprised the number isn't even bigger, especially considering short week road game for Stanford and ASU at home on a Friday night.

While I think that ASU looks like a team that will cause us a variety of problems, looking at their stats is very misleading.  UCLA is the best barometer, but the Bruins have been all over the place from week to week this year. ASU's other opponents have been an FCS school and two FBS teams who rank at the bottom of all FBS teams in many important categories.  I think ASU passes the eye test, but I would not give much credence to what their stats tell us about them at this point in the season.

[Renaissance Man]

Read my post in the predictions thread that presents clear data as to why Stanford has no chance at ASU and you might feel less sanguine.

To be fair, I initially doubted the credibility of ASU being favored by 10+, but after looking at the stats - including one common opponent in UCLA - I'm surprised the number isn't even bigger, especially considering short week road game for Stanford and ASU at home on a Friday night.

While I think that ASU looks like a team that will cause us a variety of problems, looking at their stats is very misleading.  UCLA is the best barometer, but the Bruins have been all over the place from week to week this year. ASU's other opponents have been an FCS school and two FBS teams who rank at the bottom of all FBS teams in many important categories.  I think ASU passes the eye test, but I would not give much credence to what their stats tell us about them at this point in the season.

[needle]

Read my post in the predictions thread that presents clear data as to why Stanford has no chance at ASU and you might feel less sanguine.

To be fair, I initially doubted the credibility of ASU being favored by 10+, but after looking at the stats - including one common opponent in UCLA - I'm surprised the number isn't even bigger, especially considering short week road game for Stanford and ASU at home on a Friday night.

While I think that ASU looks like a team that will cause us a variety of problems, looking at their stats is very misleading.  UCLA is the best barometer, but the Bruins have been all over the place from week to week this year. ASU's other opponents have been an FCS school and two FBS teams who rank at the bottom of all FBS teams in many important categories.  I think ASU passes the eye test, but I would not give much credence to what their stats tell us about them at this point in the season.

Take a look at the stats now and where teams rank relative to one another.

Look again at the end of the season.

My hypothesis is that five games is just enough data so that 90% of teams won't move up or down in those final stat rankings (compared to now) more than 15 spots.

Total Defense national ranking (Pac-12 teams) [this is ypg allowed]

12th (tied) - ASU
25th - Utah
43rd - Washington
52nd - Oregon State
62nd - USC
63rd - Arizona
72nd - Washington State
74th - Colorado
77th - California
88th - Stanford
90th - UCLA
95th - Oregon

[needle]

Read my post in the predictions thread that presents clear data as to why Stanford has no chance at ASU and you might feel less sanguine.

To be fair, I initially doubted the credibility of ASU being favored by 10+, but after looking at the stats - including one common opponent in UCLA - I'm surprised the number isn't even bigger, especially considering short week road game for Stanford and ASU at home on a Friday night.

While I think that ASU looks like a team that will cause us a variety of problems, looking at their stats is very misleading.  UCLA is the best barometer, but the Bruins have been all over the place from week to week this year. ASU's other opponents have been an FCS school and two FBS teams who rank at the bottom of all FBS teams in many important categories.  I think ASU passes the eye test, but I would not give much credence to what their stats tell us about them at this point in the season.

Take a look at the stats now and where teams rank relative to one another.

Look again at the end of the season.

My hypothesis is that five games is just enough data so that 90% of teams won't move up or down in those final stat rankings (compared to now) more than 15 spots.

Total Defense national ranking (Pac-12 teams) [this is ypg allowed]

12th (tied) - ASU
25th - Utah
43rd - Washington
52nd - Oregon State
62nd - USC
63rd - Arizona
72nd - Washington State
74th - Colorado
77th - California
88th - Stanford
90th - UCLA
95th - Oregon

[OutsiderFan]

I don't bet on sports. I don't have the inclination to study all teams and make lots of wagers. And I know one-off bets will lose you money in the long run.

I never thought Oregon was a great team, so though I was surprised Stanford won, the 8 pt spread certainly suggested Stanford would be competitive, and when competitive, anything can happen, like 30 yards in personal fouls against Oregon, and a PI in EZ on last play of regulation time.

ASU intrigued me, so I looked at the stats and saw a team Stanford can't beat based on how the teams have performed to date. It can all change in one night, but not likely.

[OutsiderFan]

I don't bet on sports. I don't have the inclination to study all teams and make lots of wagers. And I know one-off bets will lose you money in the long run.

I never thought Oregon was a great team, so though I was surprised Stanford won, the 8 pt spread certainly suggested Stanford would be competitive, and when competitive, anything can happen, like 30 yards in personal fouls against Oregon, and a PI in EZ on last play of regulation time.

ASU intrigued me, so I looked at the stats and saw a team Stanford can't beat based on how the teams have performed to date. It can all change in one night, but not likely.

[BostonCard]

I can see one of two results:

ASU's superior athleticism and talent on offense and defense wins out, and Stanford gets blown out (2+ TD loss)
Stanford capitalizes on ASU's lack of discipline (turnovers and penalties) and pulls out a narrow win

I think the first is much more likely than the second (I don't think we are a good match-up for ASU), and the spread reflects that.  But, I have hope that somehow the second comes to pass and Shaw pulls another rabbit out his hat.

BC

[BostonCard]

I can see one of two results:

ASU's superior athleticism and talent on offense and defense wins out, and Stanford gets blown out (2+ TD loss)
Stanford capitalizes on ASU's lack of discipline (turnovers and penalties) and pulls out a narrow win

I think the first is much more likely than the second (I don't think we are a good match-up for ASU), and the spread reflects that.  But, I have hope that somehow the second comes to pass and Shaw pulls another rabbit out his hat.

BC

[teejers1]

I can see one of two results:

ASU's superior athleticism and talent on offense and defense wins out, and Stanford gets blown out (2+ TD loss)
Stanford capitalizes on ASU's lack of discipline (turnovers and penalties) and pulls out a narrow win

I think the first is much more likely than the second (I don't think we are a good match-up for ASU), and the spread reflects that.  But, I have hope that somehow the second comes to pass and Shaw pulls another rabbit out his hat.

BC

+1.

And the spread is up to 13 points, isn't it?

Bad matchup for Stanford (and an angry opponent/coaching staff that might want to run it up on Sanctimonious Stanford . . . but perhaps might also commit some costly PFs).

[teejers1]

I can see one of two results:

ASU's superior athleticism and talent on offense and defense wins out, and Stanford gets blown out (2+ TD loss)
Stanford capitalizes on ASU's lack of discipline (turnovers and penalties) and pulls out a narrow win

I think the first is much more likely than the second (I don't think we are a good match-up for ASU), and the spread reflects that.  But, I have hope that somehow the second comes to pass and Shaw pulls another rabbit out his hat.

BC

+1.

And the spread is up to 13 points, isn't it?

Bad matchup for Stanford (and an angry opponent/coaching staff that might want to run it up on Sanctimonious Stanford . . . but perhaps might also commit some costly PFs).

[SamuelMcF]

I also see an O/U of 5 assistants being thrown under the bus to save Herm's job in light of all the recruiting violations.

[SamuelMcF]

I also see an O/U of 5 assistants being thrown under the bus to save Herm's job in light of all the recruiting violations.

[OutsiderFan]

Can you have any more evidence as to why betting on these games is crazy?

Stanford was down 18 points and had the ball at midfield (like seemingly the whole game) with 5 mins. to go. They easily could have scored a TD to get to -11 and Edwards wasn't trying to score again, and if this happened, you would have lost if you took ASU -12 to 13.5.  

The game outcome was not surprising in the least based on the stats I provided.


It's so long past time for Lance Anderson to be relieved of his duties. What exactly is he doing that demonstrates acceptable performance?  He used to at one time recruit and develop good players, but that's not happening anymore. So now Stanford has the worst defense in the Pac-12, and if not the complete worst overall, certainly the softest and worst against the run. When do you start being held accountable for performance on the Stanford coaching staff?

Stanford was outgunned on the ground 255 to 13. What does it say about a program built on running the ball that this can be allowed to happen?

[OutsiderFan]

Can you have any more evidence as to why betting on these games is crazy?

Stanford was down 18 points and had the ball at midfield (like seemingly the whole game) with 5 mins. to go. They easily could have scored a TD to get to -11 and Edwards wasn't trying to score again, and if this happened, you would have lost if you took ASU -12 to 13.5.  

The game outcome was not surprising in the least based on the stats I provided.


It's so long past time for Lance Anderson to be relieved of his duties. What exactly is he doing that demonstrates acceptable performance?  He used to at one time recruit and develop good players, but that's not happening anymore. So now Stanford has the worst defense in the Pac-12, and if not the complete worst overall, certainly the softest and worst against the run. When do you start being held accountable for performance on the Stanford coaching staff?

Stanford was outgunned on the ground 255 to 13. What does it say about a program built on running the ball that this can be allowed to happen?

[JohnR34231]

Can you have any more evidence as to why betting on these games is crazy?

Stanford was down 18 points and had the ball at midfield (like seemingly the whole game) with 5 mins. to go. They easily could have scored a TD to get to -11 and Edwards wasn't trying to score again, and if this happened, you would have lost if you took ASU -12 to 13.5.  

The game outcome was not surprising in the least based on the stats I provided.


It's so long past time for Lance Anderson to be relieved of his duties. What exactly is he doing that demonstrates acceptable performance?  He used to at one time recruit and develop good players, but that's not happening anymore. So now Stanford has the worst defense in the Pac-12, and if not the complete worst overall, certainly the softest and worst against the run. When do you start being held accountable for performance on the Stanford coaching staff?

Stanford was outgunned on the ground 255 to 13. What does it say about a program built on running the ball that this can be allowed to happen?

Although the defense's play was pretty pathetic early in the game they did stiffen up, and as a result ASU scored the fewest points that they have in conference play so far.
It was the offense that was the goat in this one, at least IMO. They gave up almost as many points (7 on a pick six) as they scored (10).

[JohnR34231]

Can you have any more evidence as to why betting on these games is crazy?

Stanford was down 18 points and had the ball at midfield (like seemingly the whole game) with 5 mins. to go. They easily could have scored a TD to get to -11 and Edwards wasn't trying to score again, and if this happened, you would have lost if you took ASU -12 to 13.5.  

The game outcome was not surprising in the least based on the stats I provided.


It's so long past time for Lance Anderson to be relieved of his duties. What exactly is he doing that demonstrates acceptable performance?  He used to at one time recruit and develop good players, but that's not happening anymore. So now Stanford has the worst defense in the Pac-12, and if not the complete worst overall, certainly the softest and worst against the run. When do you start being held accountable for performance on the Stanford coaching staff?

Stanford was outgunned on the ground 255 to 13. What does it say about a program built on running the ball that this can be allowed to happen?

Although the defense's play was pretty pathetic early in the game they did stiffen up, and as a result ASU scored the fewest points that they have in conference play so far.
It was the offense that was the goat in this one, at least IMO. They gave up almost as many points (7 on a pick six) as they scored (10).

[Phogge]

Both lines are terrible. The OT’s are soft.

Poor tackling all around.

Overall awful.

[Phogge]

Both lines are terrible. The OT’s are soft.

Poor tackling all around.

Overall awful.

[JohnR34231]

Both lines are terrible. The OT’s are soft.

Poor tackling all around.

Overall awful.

The positive way of looking at things is ASU is quite possibly the best team in the conference and we were right in the game until McKee's pick six.
We'll win a few more. No one expected a rose garden this year.

[JohnR34231]

Both lines are terrible. The OT’s are soft.

Poor tackling all around.

Overall awful.

The positive way of looking at things is ASU is quite possibly the best team in the conference and we were right in the game until McKee's pick six.
We'll win a few more. No one expected a rose garden this year.

[teejers1]

Both lines are terrible. The OT’s are soft.

Poor tackling all around.

Overall awful.

The positive way of looking at things is ASU is quite possibly the best team in the conference and we were right in the game until McKee's pick six.
We'll win a few more. No one expected a rose garden this year.

It's not much fun getting completely outclassed.

As for rose gardens, the problem is that there isn't one expected in the foreseeable future . . .

[teejers1]

Both lines are terrible. The OT’s are soft.

Poor tackling all around.

Overall awful.

The positive way of looking at things is ASU is quite possibly the best team in the conference and we were right in the game until McKee's pick six.
We'll win a few more. No one expected a rose garden this year.

It's not much fun getting completely outclassed.

As for rose gardens, the problem is that there isn't one expected in the foreseeable future . . .

[BostonCard]

I’m not sure it’s fair to say that we were right in it until the pick six.  ASU was clearly in control, even though the 11 point deficit gave us some hope that if we could just have scored on that drive rather than throw a pick six, it would have been a one-score game.

We weren’t really in it.

BC

[BostonCard]

I’m not sure it’s fair to say that we were right in it until the pick six.  ASU was clearly in control, even though the 11 point deficit gave us some hope that if we could just have scored on that drive rather than throw a pick six, it would have been a one-score game.

We weren’t really in it.

BC

[JohnR34231]

I’m not sure it’s fair to say that we were right in it until the pick six.  ASU was clearly in control, even though the 11 point deficit gave us some hope that if we could just have scored on that drive rather than throw a pick six, it would have been a one-score game.

We weren’t really in it.

BC

Yeah, I didn't expect a lot of attaboys for that comment.

[JohnR34231]

I’m not sure it’s fair to say that we were right in it until the pick six.  ASU was clearly in control, even though the 11 point deficit gave us some hope that if we could just have scored on that drive rather than throw a pick six, it would have been a one-score game.

We weren’t really in it.

BC

Yeah, I didn't expect a lot of attaboys for that comment.