08-26-2016, 08:28 AM
Since we've only got 59ers-Hawai'i this week, I'm decreeing this Week 0.
https://twitter.com/SBN_BillC/status/769193353069989889
https://twitter.com/SBN_BillC/status/769193353069989889
Week 0 in opponents
Since we've only got 59ers-Hawai'i this week, I'm decreeing this Week 0.
https://twitter.com/SBN_BillC/status/769193353069989889
https://twitter.com/SBN_BillC/status/769193353069989889
08-26-2016, 10:44 AM
Ugh, as the only college football game of the week it would be helpful for the Pac-12 narrative for UCB to win the game. Not super excited about it.
I probably will hope that UCB wins, but will chuckle throughout the weekend if the blues find a way to lose.
It is highly unlikely a 2 loss Pac-12 champ gets into the playoff over a 1 loss champ. The Pac-12 SOS is critical to make sure a 2 loss Pac-12 champ gets into the playoff over other 2 loss champs. If a Pac-12 team is in the playoff that should be a net good for Stanford Football.
So....for now....roll on you Bears, Beavs, Buffs, and other Pac-12 teams.
I probably will hope that UCB wins, but will chuckle throughout the weekend if the blues find a way to lose.
It is highly unlikely a 2 loss Pac-12 champ gets into the playoff over a 1 loss champ. The Pac-12 SOS is critical to make sure a 2 loss Pac-12 champ gets into the playoff over other 2 loss champs. If a Pac-12 team is in the playoff that should be a net good for Stanford Football.
So....for now....roll on you Bears, Beavs, Buffs, and other Pac-12 teams.
Ugh, as the only college football game of the week it would be helpful for the Pac-12 narrative for UCB to win the game. Not super excited about it.
I probably will hope that UCB wins, but will chuckle throughout the weekend if the blues find a way to lose.
It is highly unlikely a 2 loss Pac-12 champ gets into the playoff over a 1 loss champ. The Pac-12 SOS is critical to make sure a 2 loss Pac-12 champ gets into the playoff over other 2 loss champs. If a Pac-12 team is in the playoff that should be a net good for Stanford Football.
So....for now....roll on you Bears, Beavs, Buffs, and other Pac-12 teams.
I probably will hope that UCB wins, but will chuckle throughout the weekend if the blues find a way to lose.
It is highly unlikely a 2 loss Pac-12 champ gets into the playoff over a 1 loss champ. The Pac-12 SOS is critical to make sure a 2 loss Pac-12 champ gets into the playoff over other 2 loss champs. If a Pac-12 team is in the playoff that should be a net good for Stanford Football.
So....for now....roll on you Bears, Beavs, Buffs, and other Pac-12 teams.
08-26-2016, 11:13 AM
(08-26-2016, 10:44 AM)Farm93 link Wrote:It is highly unlikely a 2 loss Pac-12 champ gets into the playoff over a 1 loss champ.Â
True, but you could have just written that it is highly unlikely for a 2 loss conference champ to get into the playoff over a one loss Power 5 conference champ.
... with the possible exception of an SEC champ. That would be an interesting situation.
Quote:The Pac-12 SOS is critical to make sure a 2 loss Pac-12 champ gets into the playoff over other 2 loss champs.
Well, probably the biggest issue in such an occurrence is out of conference strength of schedule. A team's overall SOS will also come into play, which of course is determined by strength of the conference. I don't think there is really any discussion of strengths of the conferences by itself.
Of course Stanford's SOS is impacted by whether Cal beats Hawaii or not, but it provides such a tiny increment it's hard to think that will influence my cheering biases.
Quote:Â
If a Pac-12 team is in the playoff that should be a net good for Stanford Football.
That is not at all clear to me.
If that playoff team is one of our main recruiting rivals, it could be a tangible hit to Stanford. Otherwise it's all about whether fans want to chant their conference name, literally or metaphorically.
Personally, I'd probably tend to cheer for the other Pac 12 team in that scenario, but purely because it would be a team I know better and tend to favor.
(08-26-2016, 10:44 AM)Farm93 link Wrote:It is highly unlikely a 2 loss Pac-12 champ gets into the playoff over a 1 loss champ.Â
True, but you could have just written that it is highly unlikely for a 2 loss conference champ to get into the playoff over a one loss Power 5 conference champ.
... with the possible exception of an SEC champ. That would be an interesting situation.
Quote:The Pac-12 SOS is critical to make sure a 2 loss Pac-12 champ gets into the playoff over other 2 loss champs.
Well, probably the biggest issue in such an occurrence is out of conference strength of schedule. A team's overall SOS will also come into play, which of course is determined by strength of the conference. I don't think there is really any discussion of strengths of the conferences by itself.
Of course Stanford's SOS is impacted by whether Cal beats Hawaii or not, but it provides such a tiny increment it's hard to think that will influence my cheering biases.
Quote:Â
If a Pac-12 team is in the playoff that should be a net good for Stanford Football.
That is not at all clear to me.
If that playoff team is one of our main recruiting rivals, it could be a tangible hit to Stanford. Otherwise it's all about whether fans want to chant their conference name, literally or metaphorically.
Personally, I'd probably tend to cheer for the other Pac 12 team in that scenario, but purely because it would be a team I know better and tend to favor.
08-26-2016, 12:32 PM
I wish they would do the east coast a favor and start the game at 11am there time.
08-26-2016, 04:04 PM
Although many SEC teams only play 4 road games, my guess is a two loss SEC champ gets into the playoff even if the other four conferences have 1 loss champs. The SEC has a virtual lock at this point. The BigTen has a lot of schedule misses now so that they should be able to produce a 1 loss team most of the time. So the remaining three conferences are likely going to be stuck playing musical chairs for the remaining two spots until this system changes.
That would be OK, but the BigTen and SEC also have virtual locks for their second and third place teams across the New Year's six bowls. Ugh!
Eager to see the day when the men in the brightly colored blazers are no longer in control of CFB's post season.
That would be OK, but the BigTen and SEC also have virtual locks for their second and third place teams across the New Year's six bowls. Ugh!
Eager to see the day when the men in the brightly colored blazers are no longer in control of CFB's post season.
Although many SEC teams only play 4 road games, my guess is a two loss SEC champ gets into the playoff even if the other four conferences have 1 loss champs. The SEC has a virtual lock at this point. The BigTen has a lot of schedule misses now so that they should be able to produce a 1 loss team most of the time. So the remaining three conferences are likely going to be stuck playing musical chairs for the remaining two spots until this system changes.
That would be OK, but the BigTen and SEC also have virtual locks for their second and third place teams across the New Year's six bowls. Ugh!
Eager to see the day when the men in the brightly colored blazers are no longer in control of CFB's post season.
That would be OK, but the BigTen and SEC also have virtual locks for their second and third place teams across the New Year's six bowls. Ugh!
Eager to see the day when the men in the brightly colored blazers are no longer in control of CFB's post season.
08-26-2016, 04:14 PM
The scenario in which the SEC doesn't send a team to the playoff occurs if a two-loss SEC East champion (say Florida) beats a one-loss SEC West Champion (say LSU), and the SEC is left with a perceived to be weaker 2-loss champion or a stronger 2-loss division champ that didn't win their conference.
BC
BC
The scenario in which the SEC doesn't send a team to the playoff occurs if a two-loss SEC East champion (say Florida) beats a one-loss SEC West Champion (say LSU), and the SEC is left with a perceived to be weaker 2-loss champion or a stronger 2-loss division champ that didn't win their conference.
BC
BC
08-26-2016, 05:57 PM
(08-26-2016, 04:04 PM)Farm93 link Wrote:Although many SEC teams only play 4 road games, my guess is a two loss SEC champ gets into the playoff even if the other four conferences have 1 loss champs. The SEC has a virtual lock at this point.Â
I cannot see any evidence that that would occur.
Of course I don't see any evidence it wouldn't, but no reason to let paranoia take over.
Quote:Eager to see the day when the men in the brightly colored blazers are no longer in control of CFB's post season.
I don't see any plausible scenario where somebody isn't determining which teams get into a post season.
It may be that they could get rid of the blazers.
(08-26-2016, 04:04 PM)Farm93 link Wrote:Although many SEC teams only play 4 road games, my guess is a two loss SEC champ gets into the playoff even if the other four conferences have 1 loss champs. The SEC has a virtual lock at this point.Â
I cannot see any evidence that that would occur.
Of course I don't see any evidence it wouldn't, but no reason to let paranoia take over.
Quote:Eager to see the day when the men in the brightly colored blazers are no longer in control of CFB's post season.
I don't see any plausible scenario where somebody isn't determining which teams get into a post season.
It may be that they could get rid of the blazers.
Redrum
Unregistered
Unregistered
(08-26-2016, 08:13 PM)Redrum link Wrote:I don't see the bares losing this one.
Really? I can see it. Surprisingly evenly matched so far, I'm wonder if that's commentary on Ca[i][b][i][/i][/b][/i]l or Hawaii.
Okay well now it might be beyond Hawaii's reach, and holy crap #6 is fast.
(08-26-2016, 08:13 PM)Redrum link Wrote:I don't see the bares losing this one.
Really? I can see it. Surprisingly evenly matched so far, I'm wonder if that's commentary on Ca[i][b][i][/i][/b][/i]l or Hawaii.
Okay well now it might be beyond Hawaii's reach, and holy crap #6 is fast.
08-27-2016, 05:00 AM
Low APR U gave up 10 ypp to a middling non-P5 team. That defense won't stop ANYONE in the Pac-12 other than maybe Oregon St. I'm sticking by my 4-8 prediction.
08-27-2016, 06:31 AM
First week and the distant location probably should not be overlooked. I am sure most teams would take that win in those circumstances. Still the UCB D looked bad.
08-27-2016, 06:42 AM
https://twitter.com/SportSourceA/status/...5724437505
Probably the circumstances are too unusual to take much of a firm judgment, but the 59ers' defense looked bad. Pushed around, really.
You'd think the time zone problems would be distributed relatively evenly, but who knows.
Probably the circumstances are too unusual to take much of a firm judgment, but the 59ers' defense looked bad. Pushed around, really.
You'd think the time zone problems would be distributed relatively evenly, but who knows.
https://twitter.com/SportSourceA/status/...5724437505
Probably the circumstances are too unusual to take much of a firm judgment, but the 59ers' defense looked bad. Pushed around, really.
You'd think the time zone problems would be distributed relatively evenly, but who knows.
Probably the circumstances are too unusual to take much of a firm judgment, but the 59ers' defense looked bad. Pushed around, really.
You'd think the time zone problems would be distributed relatively evenly, but who knows.
08-27-2016, 12:41 PM
You don't need stats to see Cal's defense is really, really terrible, but Hawaii was +1 in rushing differential, and really only lost because they had essentially 6 turnovers. Cal still managed to yield:
31 points
482 yards
8-14 3rd down conversions
6.5 YPC
And BTW, Hawaii's 3.9 YPC ranked 116th in 2015, and the QB is awful as well.Â
Chris Warren may set the all-time single game rushing record when Texas plays the Bares in a couple weeks.Â
31 points
482 yards
8-14 3rd down conversions
6.5 YPC
And BTW, Hawaii's 3.9 YPC ranked 116th in 2015, and the QB is awful as well.Â
Chris Warren may set the all-time single game rushing record when Texas plays the Bares in a couple weeks.Â
You don't need stats to see Cal's defense is really, really terrible, but Hawaii was +1 in rushing differential, and really only lost because they had essentially 6 turnovers. Cal still managed to yield:
31 points
482 yards
8-14 3rd down conversions
6.5 YPC
And BTW, Hawaii's 3.9 YPC ranked 116th in 2015, and the QB is awful as well.Â
Chris Warren may set the all-time single game rushing record when Texas plays the Bares in a couple weeks.Â
31 points
482 yards
8-14 3rd down conversions
6.5 YPC
And BTW, Hawaii's 3.9 YPC ranked 116th in 2015, and the QB is awful as well.Â
Chris Warren may set the all-time single game rushing record when Texas plays the Bares in a couple weeks.Â
08-27-2016, 07:12 PM
(08-27-2016, 12:41 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:but Hawaii was +1 in rushing differential
What is rushing differential?
08-27-2016, 09:02 PM
1. Cal's tackling was abysmal
2. A series of turnovers by Hawaii at the end of the first half gave Cal a cushion that didn't really reflect how competitive the game was.
3. Hawaii was missing three presumed starters who were held our for disciplinary reasons.
But then again it's dangerous to read too much into an opening game, as we know ourselves from last year.
2. A series of turnovers by Hawaii at the end of the first half gave Cal a cushion that didn't really reflect how competitive the game was.
3. Hawaii was missing three presumed starters who were held our for disciplinary reasons.
But then again it's dangerous to read too much into an opening game, as we know ourselves from last year.
1. Cal's tackling was abysmal
2. A series of turnovers by Hawaii at the end of the first half gave Cal a cushion that didn't really reflect how competitive the game was.
3. Hawaii was missing three presumed starters who were held our for disciplinary reasons.
But then again it's dangerous to read too much into an opening game, as we know ourselves from last year.
2. A series of turnovers by Hawaii at the end of the first half gave Cal a cushion that didn't really reflect how competitive the game was.
3. Hawaii was missing three presumed starters who were held our for disciplinary reasons.
But then again it's dangerous to read too much into an opening game, as we know ourselves from last year.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »