[stupac2]

Just because I don't have the same level of pride in Stanford that most of you have as alums, doesn't make my takes on what Stanford does or doesn't do any less relevant.

Is anyone saying that?

I don't really know why you're so stuck on this, if you look [url=http://"http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php?topic=17613.0"]at the thread in question[/url] your opinion seemed to be:

1) Utah's QB is terrible.
2) Utah hadn't beaten anyone.
3) Therefore it wasn't a good win.

Which all hinges on what "good" means. We were up 10 points and would've won by at least that if not for TWO idiotic roughing the QB penalties, on the road, in a stadium where we hadn't won at in ages. Should we have won by more than 3? Definitely. Was it a particularly dominant showing? No. But it was still a good win! You can't take road wins for granted, look at UW completely faceplanting against an ASU team that we destroyed and that got destroyed by USC. It's college football. Shit happens.

[stupac2]

Just because I don't have the same level of pride in Stanford that most of you have as alums, doesn't make my takes on what Stanford does or doesn't do any less relevant.

Is anyone saying that?

I don't really know why you're so stuck on this, if you look [url=http://"http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php?topic=17613.0"]at the thread in question[/url] your opinion seemed to be:

1) Utah's QB is terrible.
2) Utah hadn't beaten anyone.
3) Therefore it wasn't a good win.

Which all hinges on what "good" means. We were up 10 points and would've won by at least that if not for TWO idiotic roughing the QB penalties, on the road, in a stadium where we hadn't won at in ages. Should we have won by more than 3? Definitely. Was it a particularly dominant showing? No. But it was still a good win! You can't take road wins for granted, look at UW completely faceplanting against an ASU team that we destroyed and that got destroyed by USC. It's college football. Shit happens.