[Roberton3]

Wilner ranges from harsh-but-fair to trollish in his Stanford assessment: http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...e-week-64/

Because I feel like being grumpy, here's the objectionable part:

Without quarterback Anu Solomon and Scooby Wright and others, Arizona was completely overmatched.

Anything closer than three or four touchdowns would have been a surprise.

... If it was such a surprise, why did the spread get bet down from -17.5 to -10? I'm not saying you have to take the gambling public's views as gospel, but you should at least account for it.

In Wilner's defense (a phrase you won't hear very often from me), in his Pac-12 Picks of the Week he picked Stanford, giving 17.5 points.  So he's being consistent.

[Roberton3]

Wilner ranges from harsh-but-fair to trollish in his Stanford assessment: http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...e-week-64/

Because I feel like being grumpy, here's the objectionable part:

Without quarterback Anu Solomon and Scooby Wright and others, Arizona was completely overmatched.

Anything closer than three or four touchdowns would have been a surprise.

... If it was such a surprise, why did the spread get bet down from -17.5 to -10? I'm not saying you have to take the gambling public's views as gospel, but you should at least account for it.

In Wilner's defense (a phrase you won't hear very often from me), in his Pac-12 Picks of the Week he picked Stanford, giving 17.5 points.  So he's being consistent.