[Hank 91]

Here's this week's preview, which includes a Q&A with UW Dawg Pound

http://www.gomightycard.com/2016/09/blog...skies.html

The SB Nation blogs don't usually ask me to answer any questions, preferring to stick with their brethren at Rule of Tree, but these guys did. But then they didn't feel my answer to their special teams question was extensive enough, so I sent them another paragraph. That paragraph arrived ten minutes after their deadline, so they left my answers out of their preview. I thought I'd post them here, just so someone gets to read them. (It could be for the best -- I mentioned that Meeks and Holder might play; looks like I was wrong.)

1) Ryan Burns has not been overly impressive in Stanford’s first three
games. Burns has definitely struggled with accuracy, but did engineer the
game winning TD drive last week. How close are fans to wanting a change to
QB Keller Chryst? More importantly, how long is David Shaw’s leash with
Burns?

Ryan Burns was the third string quarterback behind Kevin Hogan and Keller Chryst last season. Based on that, as well as Chryst's background (highly touted recruit, played across the street at Palo Alto High School, raised by a football coach), I think all observers fully expected Chryst to win the job this year. Even when Burns was named the starter, David Shaw said that Chryst would still play, so it felt like the competition was still going. That turned out not to be the case, however, as Chryst was given one series in the opener against Kansas State, nothing against USC, and just a few plays against UCLA. This job belongs to Burns. I think his slow start is more about play calling than anything else. Like any new quarterback -- even though he's a senior, he's perhaps the most inexperienced senior you'll ever find -- he's shown a tendency to lock onto his primary receiver, and that's been a problem. (I'd disagree with your assessment of his accuracy, however. He's been pretty good in this area.) But Stanford fans have been spoiled. There have essentially been only two starting quarterbacks on the Farm over the past seven years -- Andrew Luck and Kevin Hogan. Even though Stanford is 3-0, and even though Burns engineered a game-winning drive last week against UCLA that would've made any quarterback proud, there are people calling for Chryst to get a shot. That won't happen any time soon. The only way Chryst would get a start would be if his backup playing time expanded and he started outperforming Burns. That was how Hogan claimed the job way back when, but I don't see it happening here.


2) Stanford (aka Tight End U) always seems to have a wealth of 6-6, 250 lb
bookends at the TE position who catch a ton of balls and score touchdowns.
So far in 2016, Greg Taboada and Dalton Schultz have combined for only five
grabs and have yet to find the end zone. Are these two not up to par with
their predecessors, or is it really more a product of the limited passing
attempts and quarterback struggles?

2. You're right about Stanford and the tight end position, and you're also right to be surprised by the lack of production thus far. Greg Taboada is good, but Dalton Schultz has the potential to be as good as any tight end in school history. You know the old axiom -- a young quarterback's best friend is a good tight end -- but that hasn't been the case this season. The offense is just different this year, but I suspect that as the season wears on and Burns becomes more comfortable, the playbook will open up a bit.


3) Death, taxes, and Stanford will have a dominating O-Line and D-Line.
True again in 2016?

3. The offensive line is solid, though it's interesting that last week they decided to swap the left and right tackles, something I never remember happening. There are three new starters the line, so I'd say they're actually ahead of schedule in terms of coming together and gelling as a unit. They led the way to more than 200 yards rushing last week against a UCLA run defense that had been a strength in the early going, and those were hard-earned yards, not 70-yard McCaffrey runs. On the defensive side, things are in much better shape than last year. That unit was decimated by injuries, and there were rarely more than four healthy defensive linemen. Nose tackle Harrison Phillips missed almost all of 2015, as well as the USC game two weeks ago, but he seemed to play without limitations against UCLA, which is a great sign. The star of this group and a future first-round pick, is Solomon Thomas. He's a freakish athlete who will make his presence felt all night long.

[Hank 91]

Here's this week's preview, which includes a Q&A with UW Dawg Pound

http://www.gomightycard.com/2016/09/blog...skies.html

The SB Nation blogs don't usually ask me to answer any questions, preferring to stick with their brethren at Rule of Tree, but these guys did. But then they didn't feel my answer to their special teams question was extensive enough, so I sent them another paragraph. That paragraph arrived ten minutes after their deadline, so they left my answers out of their preview. I thought I'd post them here, just so someone gets to read them. (It could be for the best -- I mentioned that Meeks and Holder might play; looks like I was wrong.)

1) Ryan Burns has not been overly impressive in Stanford’s first three
games. Burns has definitely struggled with accuracy, but did engineer the
game winning TD drive last week. How close are fans to wanting a change to
QB Keller Chryst? More importantly, how long is David Shaw’s leash with
Burns?

Ryan Burns was the third string quarterback behind Kevin Hogan and Keller Chryst last season. Based on that, as well as Chryst's background (highly touted recruit, played across the street at Palo Alto High School, raised by a football coach), I think all observers fully expected Chryst to win the job this year. Even when Burns was named the starter, David Shaw said that Chryst would still play, so it felt like the competition was still going. That turned out not to be the case, however, as Chryst was given one series in the opener against Kansas State, nothing against USC, and just a few plays against UCLA. This job belongs to Burns. I think his slow start is more about play calling than anything else. Like any new quarterback -- even though he's a senior, he's perhaps the most inexperienced senior you'll ever find -- he's shown a tendency to lock onto his primary receiver, and that's been a problem. (I'd disagree with your assessment of his accuracy, however. He's been pretty good in this area.) But Stanford fans have been spoiled. There have essentially been only two starting quarterbacks on the Farm over the past seven years -- Andrew Luck and Kevin Hogan. Even though Stanford is 3-0, and even though Burns engineered a game-winning drive last week against UCLA that would've made any quarterback proud, there are people calling for Chryst to get a shot. That won't happen any time soon. The only way Chryst would get a start would be if his backup playing time expanded and he started outperforming Burns. That was how Hogan claimed the job way back when, but I don't see it happening here.


2) Stanford (aka Tight End U) always seems to have a wealth of 6-6, 250 lb
bookends at the TE position who catch a ton of balls and score touchdowns.
So far in 2016, Greg Taboada and Dalton Schultz have combined for only five
grabs and have yet to find the end zone. Are these two not up to par with
their predecessors, or is it really more a product of the limited passing
attempts and quarterback struggles?

2. You're right about Stanford and the tight end position, and you're also right to be surprised by the lack of production thus far. Greg Taboada is good, but Dalton Schultz has the potential to be as good as any tight end in school history. You know the old axiom -- a young quarterback's best friend is a good tight end -- but that hasn't been the case this season. The offense is just different this year, but I suspect that as the season wears on and Burns becomes more comfortable, the playbook will open up a bit.


3) Death, taxes, and Stanford will have a dominating O-Line and D-Line.
True again in 2016?

3. The offensive line is solid, though it's interesting that last week they decided to swap the left and right tackles, something I never remember happening. There are three new starters the line, so I'd say they're actually ahead of schedule in terms of coming together and gelling as a unit. They led the way to more than 200 yards rushing last week against a UCLA run defense that had been a strength in the early going, and those were hard-earned yards, not 70-yard McCaffrey runs. On the defensive side, things are in much better shape than last year. That unit was decimated by injuries, and there were rarely more than four healthy defensive linemen. Nose tackle Harrison Phillips missed almost all of 2015, as well as the USC game two weeks ago, but he seemed to play without limitations against UCLA, which is a great sign. The star of this group and a future first-round pick, is Solomon Thomas. He's a freakish athlete who will make his presence felt all night long.

[Hank 91]

Here's this week's preview, which includes a Q&A with UW Dawg Pound

http://www.gomightycard.com/2016/09/blog...skies.html

The SB Nation blogs don't usually ask me to answer any questions, preferring to stick with their brethren at Rule of Tree, but these guys did. But then they didn't feel my answer to their special teams question was extensive enough, so I sent them another paragraph. That paragraph arrived ten minutes after their deadline, so they left my answers out of their preview. I thought I'd post them here, just so someone gets to read them. (It could be for the best -- I mentioned that Meeks and Holder might play; looks like I was wrong.)

1) Ryan Burns has not been overly impressive in Stanford’s first three
games. Burns has definitely struggled with accuracy, but did engineer the
game winning TD drive last week. How close are fans to wanting a change to
QB Keller Chryst? More importantly, how long is David Shaw’s leash with
Burns?

Ryan Burns was the third string quarterback behind Kevin Hogan and Keller Chryst last season. Based on that, as well as Chryst's background (highly touted recruit, played across the street at Palo Alto High School, raised by a football coach), I think all observers fully expected Chryst to win the job this year. Even when Burns was named the starter, David Shaw said that Chryst would still play, so it felt like the competition was still going. That turned out not to be the case, however, as Chryst was given one series in the opener against Kansas State, nothing against USC, and just a few plays against UCLA. This job belongs to Burns. I think his slow start is more about play calling than anything else. Like any new quarterback -- even though he's a senior, he's perhaps the most inexperienced senior you'll ever find -- he's shown a tendency to lock onto his primary receiver, and that's been a problem. (I'd disagree with your assessment of his accuracy, however. He's been pretty good in this area.) But Stanford fans have been spoiled. There have essentially been only two starting quarterbacks on the Farm over the past seven years -- Andrew Luck and Kevin Hogan. Even though Stanford is 3-0, and even though Burns engineered a game-winning drive last week against UCLA that would've made any quarterback proud, there are people calling for Chryst to get a shot. That won't happen any time soon. The only way Chryst would get a start would be if his backup playing time expanded and he started outperforming Burns. That was how Hogan claimed the job way back when, but I don't see it happening here.


2) Stanford (aka Tight End U) always seems to have a wealth of 6-6, 250 lb
bookends at the TE position who catch a ton of balls and score touchdowns.
So far in 2016, Greg Taboada and Dalton Schultz have combined for only five
grabs and have yet to find the end zone. Are these two not up to par with
their predecessors, or is it really more a product of the limited passing
attempts and quarterback struggles?

2. You're right about Stanford and the tight end position, and you're also right to be surprised by the lack of production thus far. Greg Taboada is good, but Dalton Schultz has the potential to be as good as any tight end in school history. You know the old axiom -- a young quarterback's best friend is a good tight end -- but that hasn't been the case this season. The offense is just different this year, but I suspect that as the season wears on and Burns becomes more comfortable, the playbook will open up a bit.


3) Death, taxes, and Stanford will have a dominating O-Line and D-Line.
True again in 2016?

3. The offensive line is solid, though it's interesting that last week they decided to swap the left and right tackles, something I never remember happening. There are three new starters the line, so I'd say they're actually ahead of schedule in terms of coming together and gelling as a unit. They led the way to more than 200 yards rushing last week against a UCLA run defense that had been a strength in the early going, and those were hard-earned yards, not 70-yard McCaffrey runs. On the defensive side, things are in much better shape than last year. That unit was decimated by injuries, and there were rarely more than four healthy defensive linemen. Nose tackle Harrison Phillips missed almost all of 2015, as well as the USC game two weeks ago, but he seemed to play without limitations against UCLA, which is a great sign. The star of this group and a future first-round pick, is Solomon Thomas. He's a freakish athlete who will make his presence felt all night long.

[Hank 91]

Here's this week's preview, which includes a Q&A with UW Dawg Pound

http://www.gomightycard.com/2016/09/blog...skies.html

The SB Nation blogs don't usually ask me to answer any questions, preferring to stick with their brethren at Rule of Tree, but these guys did. But then they didn't feel my answer to their special teams question was extensive enough, so I sent them another paragraph. That paragraph arrived ten minutes after their deadline, so they left my answers out of their preview. I thought I'd post them here, just so someone gets to read them. (It could be for the best -- I mentioned that Meeks and Holder might play; looks like I was wrong.)

1) Ryan Burns has not been overly impressive in Stanford’s first three
games. Burns has definitely struggled with accuracy, but did engineer the
game winning TD drive last week. How close are fans to wanting a change to
QB Keller Chryst? More importantly, how long is David Shaw’s leash with
Burns?

Ryan Burns was the third string quarterback behind Kevin Hogan and Keller Chryst last season. Based on that, as well as Chryst's background (highly touted recruit, played across the street at Palo Alto High School, raised by a football coach), I think all observers fully expected Chryst to win the job this year. Even when Burns was named the starter, David Shaw said that Chryst would still play, so it felt like the competition was still going. That turned out not to be the case, however, as Chryst was given one series in the opener against Kansas State, nothing against USC, and just a few plays against UCLA. This job belongs to Burns. I think his slow start is more about play calling than anything else. Like any new quarterback -- even though he's a senior, he's perhaps the most inexperienced senior you'll ever find -- he's shown a tendency to lock onto his primary receiver, and that's been a problem. (I'd disagree with your assessment of his accuracy, however. He's been pretty good in this area.) But Stanford fans have been spoiled. There have essentially been only two starting quarterbacks on the Farm over the past seven years -- Andrew Luck and Kevin Hogan. Even though Stanford is 3-0, and even though Burns engineered a game-winning drive last week against UCLA that would've made any quarterback proud, there are people calling for Chryst to get a shot. That won't happen any time soon. The only way Chryst would get a start would be if his backup playing time expanded and he started outperforming Burns. That was how Hogan claimed the job way back when, but I don't see it happening here.


2) Stanford (aka Tight End U) always seems to have a wealth of 6-6, 250 lb
bookends at the TE position who catch a ton of balls and score touchdowns.
So far in 2016, Greg Taboada and Dalton Schultz have combined for only five
grabs and have yet to find the end zone. Are these two not up to par with
their predecessors, or is it really more a product of the limited passing
attempts and quarterback struggles?

2. You're right about Stanford and the tight end position, and you're also right to be surprised by the lack of production thus far. Greg Taboada is good, but Dalton Schultz has the potential to be as good as any tight end in school history. You know the old axiom -- a young quarterback's best friend is a good tight end -- but that hasn't been the case this season. The offense is just different this year, but I suspect that as the season wears on and Burns becomes more comfortable, the playbook will open up a bit.


3) Death, taxes, and Stanford will have a dominating O-Line and D-Line.
True again in 2016?

3. The offensive line is solid, though it's interesting that last week they decided to swap the left and right tackles, something I never remember happening. There are three new starters the line, so I'd say they're actually ahead of schedule in terms of coming together and gelling as a unit. They led the way to more than 200 yards rushing last week against a UCLA run defense that had been a strength in the early going, and those were hard-earned yards, not 70-yard McCaffrey runs. On the defensive side, things are in much better shape than last year. That unit was decimated by injuries, and there were rarely more than four healthy defensive linemen. Nose tackle Harrison Phillips missed almost all of 2015, as well as the USC game two weeks ago, but he seemed to play without limitations against UCLA, which is a great sign. The star of this group and a future first-round pick, is Solomon Thomas. He's a freakish athlete who will make his presence felt all night long.

[Hank 91]

Here's this week's preview, which includes a Q&A with UW Dawg Pound

http://www.gomightycard.com/2016/09/blog...skies.html

The SB Nation blogs don't usually ask me to answer any questions, preferring to stick with their brethren at Rule of Tree, but these guys did. But then they didn't feel my answer to their special teams question was extensive enough, so I sent them another paragraph. That paragraph arrived ten minutes after their deadline, so they left my answers out of their preview. I thought I'd post them here, just so someone gets to read them. (It could be for the best -- I mentioned that Meeks and Holder might play; looks like I was wrong.)

1) Ryan Burns has not been overly impressive in Stanford’s first three
games. Burns has definitely struggled with accuracy, but did engineer the
game winning TD drive last week. How close are fans to wanting a change to
QB Keller Chryst? More importantly, how long is David Shaw’s leash with
Burns?

Ryan Burns was the third string quarterback behind Kevin Hogan and Keller Chryst last season. Based on that, as well as Chryst's background (highly touted recruit, played across the street at Palo Alto High School, raised by a football coach), I think all observers fully expected Chryst to win the job this year. Even when Burns was named the starter, David Shaw said that Chryst would still play, so it felt like the competition was still going. That turned out not to be the case, however, as Chryst was given one series in the opener against Kansas State, nothing against USC, and just a few plays against UCLA. This job belongs to Burns. I think his slow start is more about play calling than anything else. Like any new quarterback -- even though he's a senior, he's perhaps the most inexperienced senior you'll ever find -- he's shown a tendency to lock onto his primary receiver, and that's been a problem. (I'd disagree with your assessment of his accuracy, however. He's been pretty good in this area.) But Stanford fans have been spoiled. There have essentially been only two starting quarterbacks on the Farm over the past seven years -- Andrew Luck and Kevin Hogan. Even though Stanford is 3-0, and even though Burns engineered a game-winning drive last week against UCLA that would've made any quarterback proud, there are people calling for Chryst to get a shot. That won't happen any time soon. The only way Chryst would get a start would be if his backup playing time expanded and he started outperforming Burns. That was how Hogan claimed the job way back when, but I don't see it happening here.


2) Stanford (aka Tight End U) always seems to have a wealth of 6-6, 250 lb
bookends at the TE position who catch a ton of balls and score touchdowns.
So far in 2016, Greg Taboada and Dalton Schultz have combined for only five
grabs and have yet to find the end zone. Are these two not up to par with
their predecessors, or is it really more a product of the limited passing
attempts and quarterback struggles?

2. You're right about Stanford and the tight end position, and you're also right to be surprised by the lack of production thus far. Greg Taboada is good, but Dalton Schultz has the potential to be as good as any tight end in school history. You know the old axiom -- a young quarterback's best friend is a good tight end -- but that hasn't been the case this season. The offense is just different this year, but I suspect that as the season wears on and Burns becomes more comfortable, the playbook will open up a bit.


3) Death, taxes, and Stanford will have a dominating O-Line and D-Line.
True again in 2016?

3. The offensive line is solid, though it's interesting that last week they decided to swap the left and right tackles, something I never remember happening. There are three new starters the line, so I'd say they're actually ahead of schedule in terms of coming together and gelling as a unit. They led the way to more than 200 yards rushing last week against a UCLA run defense that had been a strength in the early going, and those were hard-earned yards, not 70-yard McCaffrey runs. On the defensive side, things are in much better shape than last year. That unit was decimated by injuries, and there were rarely more than four healthy defensive linemen. Nose tackle Harrison Phillips missed almost all of 2015, as well as the USC game two weeks ago, but he seemed to play without limitations against UCLA, which is a great sign. The star of this group and a future first-round pick, is Solomon Thomas. He's a freakish athlete who will make his presence felt all night long.

[Hank 91]

Here's this week's preview, which includes a Q&A with UW Dawg Pound

http://www.gomightycard.com/2016/09/blog...skies.html

The SB Nation blogs don't usually ask me to answer any questions, preferring to stick with their brethren at Rule of Tree, but these guys did. But then they didn't feel my answer to their special teams question was extensive enough, so I sent them another paragraph. That paragraph arrived ten minutes after their deadline, so they left my answers out of their preview. I thought I'd post them here, just so someone gets to read them. (It could be for the best -- I mentioned that Meeks and Holder might play; looks like I was wrong.)

1) Ryan Burns has not been overly impressive in Stanford’s first three
games. Burns has definitely struggled with accuracy, but did engineer the
game winning TD drive last week. How close are fans to wanting a change to
QB Keller Chryst? More importantly, how long is David Shaw’s leash with
Burns?

Ryan Burns was the third string quarterback behind Kevin Hogan and Keller Chryst last season. Based on that, as well as Chryst's background (highly touted recruit, played across the street at Palo Alto High School, raised by a football coach), I think all observers fully expected Chryst to win the job this year. Even when Burns was named the starter, David Shaw said that Chryst would still play, so it felt like the competition was still going. That turned out not to be the case, however, as Chryst was given one series in the opener against Kansas State, nothing against USC, and just a few plays against UCLA. This job belongs to Burns. I think his slow start is more about play calling than anything else. Like any new quarterback -- even though he's a senior, he's perhaps the most inexperienced senior you'll ever find -- he's shown a tendency to lock onto his primary receiver, and that's been a problem. (I'd disagree with your assessment of his accuracy, however. He's been pretty good in this area.) But Stanford fans have been spoiled. There have essentially been only two starting quarterbacks on the Farm over the past seven years -- Andrew Luck and Kevin Hogan. Even though Stanford is 3-0, and even though Burns engineered a game-winning drive last week against UCLA that would've made any quarterback proud, there are people calling for Chryst to get a shot. That won't happen any time soon. The only way Chryst would get a start would be if his backup playing time expanded and he started outperforming Burns. That was how Hogan claimed the job way back when, but I don't see it happening here.


2) Stanford (aka Tight End U) always seems to have a wealth of 6-6, 250 lb
bookends at the TE position who catch a ton of balls and score touchdowns.
So far in 2016, Greg Taboada and Dalton Schultz have combined for only five
grabs and have yet to find the end zone. Are these two not up to par with
their predecessors, or is it really more a product of the limited passing
attempts and quarterback struggles?

2. You're right about Stanford and the tight end position, and you're also right to be surprised by the lack of production thus far. Greg Taboada is good, but Dalton Schultz has the potential to be as good as any tight end in school history. You know the old axiom -- a young quarterback's best friend is a good tight end -- but that hasn't been the case this season. The offense is just different this year, but I suspect that as the season wears on and Burns becomes more comfortable, the playbook will open up a bit.


3) Death, taxes, and Stanford will have a dominating O-Line and D-Line.
True again in 2016?

3. The offensive line is solid, though it's interesting that last week they decided to swap the left and right tackles, something I never remember happening. There are three new starters the line, so I'd say they're actually ahead of schedule in terms of coming together and gelling as a unit. They led the way to more than 200 yards rushing last week against a UCLA run defense that had been a strength in the early going, and those were hard-earned yards, not 70-yard McCaffrey runs. On the defensive side, things are in much better shape than last year. That unit was decimated by injuries, and there were rarely more than four healthy defensive linemen. Nose tackle Harrison Phillips missed almost all of 2015, as well as the USC game two weeks ago, but he seemed to play without limitations against UCLA, which is a great sign. The star of this group and a future first-round pick, is Solomon Thomas. He's a freakish athlete who will make his presence felt all night long.

[Hank 91]

Continued... (I exceeded the Board's character limit, apparently.)

4) How would you rate the special teams and the Cardinal kicking game? Any
good return men? Yep, we made you wait this long to gush about #5.

It's interesting to see how teams approach Christian McCaffrey as a kick returner. So far they've been avoiding him, but there's a price to be paid for that. Punters are good enough nowadays to angle the ball towards the sideline and limit any punt returner, but the only to limit McCaffrey on kickoffs is to kick it short. As a result, the Stanford offense is typically starting at the 35-yard line. Even with all of McCaffrey's success last season, I can't imagine their average drive starting spot was that high. Over the course of the season, this is a good thing for the Cardinal, but I think opposing coaches realize that if they can get through a game without watching him take one to the house, it's a good thing for them. I look forward to seeing how the Washington coaches choose to handle things on Friday night.

As for the rest of the special teams, kicker Conrad Ukropina and punter Jake Bailey have been brobdingnagian strengths. Ukropina has made some big kicks in his time, most notably a game-winning 45-yarder last season at the buzzer to beat Notre Dame, but his strength is his consistency. I've been watching Stanford football for almost thirty years now, and I can't remember being more confident in any other kicker. He only missed two field goals last season, and even though one of them was important (a 43-yarder in Stanford's two-point loss to Oregon), he's about as good as it gets at the college level. You can say the same thing for Jake Bailey. He's averaging 45.3 yards per punt, which is only fifth-best in the Pac-12, but he makes up for that with his accuracy. In the last two games he's placed three balls inside the two yard line. All in all, Stanford's special teams play is a clear strength.


5) DBs Alijah Holder and Quenton Meeks both went down with injuries in the
UCLA game. What is their status for the game? Any other injury concerns for
Stanford?

Coaches don't like to talk about injuries, but David Shaw takes this to an extreme. We never here anything, so my guess is as good as yours. We know that wide receiver Francis Owusu is definitely out after suffering a concussion against UCLA, but all we have about Meeks and Holder, the two starting cornerbacks, is that they might play, or they might not. This is a big loss, but not nearly as big as it would've been a few years ago. Never before has Stanford been as deep at this position. Meeks and Holder went out early last week, forcing backups Alameen Murphy and Terrance Alexander to come in against Josh Rosen and the UCLA passing attack. They more than held their own, as UCLA's only touchdown came before the injuries.


6) With both teams ranked in the top 10 and Washington playing in front of
a fired up capacity crowd, what are the Tree faithfull’s expectations for
Friday night? Any change in the difficulty of this game from Stanford’s
perspective after UW’s struggles with Arizona a week ago?

6. I think there's a general feeling that Washington hasn't really done anything impressive yet. Of course, that doesn't mean that they aren't deserving of all their accolades, and they could still be the best team in the North, but it's still early. If I were to guess, I'd say the Huskies' struggles with Arizona could've had something to do with this game. This is probably the team's biggest game in years, so I'd understand if they were looking past the Wildcats.

7) What is your prediction for this game?

7. It's hard for me to pick against the Cardinal, and I'm not going to start now. The defensive has just been so impressive. Kansas State might be a middle of the pack Big 12 team and USC might be spiraling, but both of those teams are talented, and UCLA has one of the top quarterbacks in the conference. None of those teams managed more than a touchdown against the Stanford defense, and I think Washington will struggle as well. On offense, I think we'll see a bit more of the playbook on Friday night. There was talk about how much that game-winning drive might do for Burns's confidence, but what could be more important is that it might've done a lot for the coaches' confidence in Burns. This is a kid who can make all the throws, and with the Husky defense geared towards stopping McCaffrey (how could it not be?), Burns will have some opportunities. I'm going to take Stanford with a 24-13 win.

[Hank 91]

Continued... (I exceeded the Board's character limit, apparently.)

4) How would you rate the special teams and the Cardinal kicking game? Any
good return men? Yep, we made you wait this long to gush about #5.

It's interesting to see how teams approach Christian McCaffrey as a kick returner. So far they've been avoiding him, but there's a price to be paid for that. Punters are good enough nowadays to angle the ball towards the sideline and limit any punt returner, but the only to limit McCaffrey on kickoffs is to kick it short. As a result, the Stanford offense is typically starting at the 35-yard line. Even with all of McCaffrey's success last season, I can't imagine their average drive starting spot was that high. Over the course of the season, this is a good thing for the Cardinal, but I think opposing coaches realize that if they can get through a game without watching him take one to the house, it's a good thing for them. I look forward to seeing how the Washington coaches choose to handle things on Friday night.

As for the rest of the special teams, kicker Conrad Ukropina and punter Jake Bailey have been brobdingnagian strengths. Ukropina has made some big kicks in his time, most notably a game-winning 45-yarder last season at the buzzer to beat Notre Dame, but his strength is his consistency. I've been watching Stanford football for almost thirty years now, and I can't remember being more confident in any other kicker. He only missed two field goals last season, and even though one of them was important (a 43-yarder in Stanford's two-point loss to Oregon), he's about as good as it gets at the college level. You can say the same thing for Jake Bailey. He's averaging 45.3 yards per punt, which is only fifth-best in the Pac-12, but he makes up for that with his accuracy. In the last two games he's placed three balls inside the two yard line. All in all, Stanford's special teams play is a clear strength.


5) DBs Alijah Holder and Quenton Meeks both went down with injuries in the
UCLA game. What is their status for the game? Any other injury concerns for
Stanford?

Coaches don't like to talk about injuries, but David Shaw takes this to an extreme. We never here anything, so my guess is as good as yours. We know that wide receiver Francis Owusu is definitely out after suffering a concussion against UCLA, but all we have about Meeks and Holder, the two starting cornerbacks, is that they might play, or they might not. This is a big loss, but not nearly as big as it would've been a few years ago. Never before has Stanford been as deep at this position. Meeks and Holder went out early last week, forcing backups Alameen Murphy and Terrance Alexander to come in against Josh Rosen and the UCLA passing attack. They more than held their own, as UCLA's only touchdown came before the injuries.


6) With both teams ranked in the top 10 and Washington playing in front of
a fired up capacity crowd, what are the Tree faithfull’s expectations for
Friday night? Any change in the difficulty of this game from Stanford’s
perspective after UW’s struggles with Arizona a week ago?

6. I think there's a general feeling that Washington hasn't really done anything impressive yet. Of course, that doesn't mean that they aren't deserving of all their accolades, and they could still be the best team in the North, but it's still early. If I were to guess, I'd say the Huskies' struggles with Arizona could've had something to do with this game. This is probably the team's biggest game in years, so I'd understand if they were looking past the Wildcats.

7) What is your prediction for this game?

7. It's hard for me to pick against the Cardinal, and I'm not going to start now. The defensive has just been so impressive. Kansas State might be a middle of the pack Big 12 team and USC might be spiraling, but both of those teams are talented, and UCLA has one of the top quarterbacks in the conference. None of those teams managed more than a touchdown against the Stanford defense, and I think Washington will struggle as well. On offense, I think we'll see a bit more of the playbook on Friday night. There was talk about how much that game-winning drive might do for Burns's confidence, but what could be more important is that it might've done a lot for the coaches' confidence in Burns. This is a kid who can make all the throws, and with the Husky defense geared towards stopping McCaffrey (how could it not be?), Burns will have some opportunities. I'm going to take Stanford with a 24-13 win.

[Hank 91]

Continued... (I exceeded the Board's character limit, apparently.)

4) How would you rate the special teams and the Cardinal kicking game? Any
good return men? Yep, we made you wait this long to gush about #5.

It's interesting to see how teams approach Christian McCaffrey as a kick returner. So far they've been avoiding him, but there's a price to be paid for that. Punters are good enough nowadays to angle the ball towards the sideline and limit any punt returner, but the only to limit McCaffrey on kickoffs is to kick it short. As a result, the Stanford offense is typically starting at the 35-yard line. Even with all of McCaffrey's success last season, I can't imagine their average drive starting spot was that high. Over the course of the season, this is a good thing for the Cardinal, but I think opposing coaches realize that if they can get through a game without watching him take one to the house, it's a good thing for them. I look forward to seeing how the Washington coaches choose to handle things on Friday night.

As for the rest of the special teams, kicker Conrad Ukropina and punter Jake Bailey have been brobdingnagian strengths. Ukropina has made some big kicks in his time, most notably a game-winning 45-yarder last season at the buzzer to beat Notre Dame, but his strength is his consistency. I've been watching Stanford football for almost thirty years now, and I can't remember being more confident in any other kicker. He only missed two field goals last season, and even though one of them was important (a 43-yarder in Stanford's two-point loss to Oregon), he's about as good as it gets at the college level. You can say the same thing for Jake Bailey. He's averaging 45.3 yards per punt, which is only fifth-best in the Pac-12, but he makes up for that with his accuracy. In the last two games he's placed three balls inside the two yard line. All in all, Stanford's special teams play is a clear strength.


5) DBs Alijah Holder and Quenton Meeks both went down with injuries in the
UCLA game. What is their status for the game? Any other injury concerns for
Stanford?

Coaches don't like to talk about injuries, but David Shaw takes this to an extreme. We never here anything, so my guess is as good as yours. We know that wide receiver Francis Owusu is definitely out after suffering a concussion against UCLA, but all we have about Meeks and Holder, the two starting cornerbacks, is that they might play, or they might not. This is a big loss, but not nearly as big as it would've been a few years ago. Never before has Stanford been as deep at this position. Meeks and Holder went out early last week, forcing backups Alameen Murphy and Terrance Alexander to come in against Josh Rosen and the UCLA passing attack. They more than held their own, as UCLA's only touchdown came before the injuries.


6) With both teams ranked in the top 10 and Washington playing in front of
a fired up capacity crowd, what are the Tree faithfull’s expectations for
Friday night? Any change in the difficulty of this game from Stanford’s
perspective after UW’s struggles with Arizona a week ago?

6. I think there's a general feeling that Washington hasn't really done anything impressive yet. Of course, that doesn't mean that they aren't deserving of all their accolades, and they could still be the best team in the North, but it's still early. If I were to guess, I'd say the Huskies' struggles with Arizona could've had something to do with this game. This is probably the team's biggest game in years, so I'd understand if they were looking past the Wildcats.

7) What is your prediction for this game?

7. It's hard for me to pick against the Cardinal, and I'm not going to start now. The defensive has just been so impressive. Kansas State might be a middle of the pack Big 12 team and USC might be spiraling, but both of those teams are talented, and UCLA has one of the top quarterbacks in the conference. None of those teams managed more than a touchdown against the Stanford defense, and I think Washington will struggle as well. On offense, I think we'll see a bit more of the playbook on Friday night. There was talk about how much that game-winning drive might do for Burns's confidence, but what could be more important is that it might've done a lot for the coaches' confidence in Burns. This is a kid who can make all the throws, and with the Husky defense geared towards stopping McCaffrey (how could it not be?), Burns will have some opportunities. I'm going to take Stanford with a 24-13 win.

[Hank 91]

Continued... (I exceeded the Board's character limit, apparently.)

4) How would you rate the special teams and the Cardinal kicking game? Any
good return men? Yep, we made you wait this long to gush about #5.

It's interesting to see how teams approach Christian McCaffrey as a kick returner. So far they've been avoiding him, but there's a price to be paid for that. Punters are good enough nowadays to angle the ball towards the sideline and limit any punt returner, but the only to limit McCaffrey on kickoffs is to kick it short. As a result, the Stanford offense is typically starting at the 35-yard line. Even with all of McCaffrey's success last season, I can't imagine their average drive starting spot was that high. Over the course of the season, this is a good thing for the Cardinal, but I think opposing coaches realize that if they can get through a game without watching him take one to the house, it's a good thing for them. I look forward to seeing how the Washington coaches choose to handle things on Friday night.

As for the rest of the special teams, kicker Conrad Ukropina and punter Jake Bailey have been brobdingnagian strengths. Ukropina has made some big kicks in his time, most notably a game-winning 45-yarder last season at the buzzer to beat Notre Dame, but his strength is his consistency. I've been watching Stanford football for almost thirty years now, and I can't remember being more confident in any other kicker. He only missed two field goals last season, and even though one of them was important (a 43-yarder in Stanford's two-point loss to Oregon), he's about as good as it gets at the college level. You can say the same thing for Jake Bailey. He's averaging 45.3 yards per punt, which is only fifth-best in the Pac-12, but he makes up for that with his accuracy. In the last two games he's placed three balls inside the two yard line. All in all, Stanford's special teams play is a clear strength.


5) DBs Alijah Holder and Quenton Meeks both went down with injuries in the
UCLA game. What is their status for the game? Any other injury concerns for
Stanford?

Coaches don't like to talk about injuries, but David Shaw takes this to an extreme. We never here anything, so my guess is as good as yours. We know that wide receiver Francis Owusu is definitely out after suffering a concussion against UCLA, but all we have about Meeks and Holder, the two starting cornerbacks, is that they might play, or they might not. This is a big loss, but not nearly as big as it would've been a few years ago. Never before has Stanford been as deep at this position. Meeks and Holder went out early last week, forcing backups Alameen Murphy and Terrance Alexander to come in against Josh Rosen and the UCLA passing attack. They more than held their own, as UCLA's only touchdown came before the injuries.


6) With both teams ranked in the top 10 and Washington playing in front of
a fired up capacity crowd, what are the Tree faithfull’s expectations for
Friday night? Any change in the difficulty of this game from Stanford’s
perspective after UW’s struggles with Arizona a week ago?

6. I think there's a general feeling that Washington hasn't really done anything impressive yet. Of course, that doesn't mean that they aren't deserving of all their accolades, and they could still be the best team in the North, but it's still early. If I were to guess, I'd say the Huskies' struggles with Arizona could've had something to do with this game. This is probably the team's biggest game in years, so I'd understand if they were looking past the Wildcats.

7) What is your prediction for this game?

7. It's hard for me to pick against the Cardinal, and I'm not going to start now. The defensive has just been so impressive. Kansas State might be a middle of the pack Big 12 team and USC might be spiraling, but both of those teams are talented, and UCLA has one of the top quarterbacks in the conference. None of those teams managed more than a touchdown against the Stanford defense, and I think Washington will struggle as well. On offense, I think we'll see a bit more of the playbook on Friday night. There was talk about how much that game-winning drive might do for Burns's confidence, but what could be more important is that it might've done a lot for the coaches' confidence in Burns. This is a kid who can make all the throws, and with the Husky defense geared towards stopping McCaffrey (how could it not be?), Burns will have some opportunities. I'm going to take Stanford with a 24-13 win.

[Hank 91]

Continued... (I exceeded the Board's character limit, apparently.)

4) How would you rate the special teams and the Cardinal kicking game? Any
good return men? Yep, we made you wait this long to gush about #5.

It's interesting to see how teams approach Christian McCaffrey as a kick returner. So far they've been avoiding him, but there's a price to be paid for that. Punters are good enough nowadays to angle the ball towards the sideline and limit any punt returner, but the only to limit McCaffrey on kickoffs is to kick it short. As a result, the Stanford offense is typically starting at the 35-yard line. Even with all of McCaffrey's success last season, I can't imagine their average drive starting spot was that high. Over the course of the season, this is a good thing for the Cardinal, but I think opposing coaches realize that if they can get through a game without watching him take one to the house, it's a good thing for them. I look forward to seeing how the Washington coaches choose to handle things on Friday night.

As for the rest of the special teams, kicker Conrad Ukropina and punter Jake Bailey have been brobdingnagian strengths. Ukropina has made some big kicks in his time, most notably a game-winning 45-yarder last season at the buzzer to beat Notre Dame, but his strength is his consistency. I've been watching Stanford football for almost thirty years now, and I can't remember being more confident in any other kicker. He only missed two field goals last season, and even though one of them was important (a 43-yarder in Stanford's two-point loss to Oregon), he's about as good as it gets at the college level. You can say the same thing for Jake Bailey. He's averaging 45.3 yards per punt, which is only fifth-best in the Pac-12, but he makes up for that with his accuracy. In the last two games he's placed three balls inside the two yard line. All in all, Stanford's special teams play is a clear strength.


5) DBs Alijah Holder and Quenton Meeks both went down with injuries in the
UCLA game. What is their status for the game? Any other injury concerns for
Stanford?

Coaches don't like to talk about injuries, but David Shaw takes this to an extreme. We never here anything, so my guess is as good as yours. We know that wide receiver Francis Owusu is definitely out after suffering a concussion against UCLA, but all we have about Meeks and Holder, the two starting cornerbacks, is that they might play, or they might not. This is a big loss, but not nearly as big as it would've been a few years ago. Never before has Stanford been as deep at this position. Meeks and Holder went out early last week, forcing backups Alameen Murphy and Terrance Alexander to come in against Josh Rosen and the UCLA passing attack. They more than held their own, as UCLA's only touchdown came before the injuries.


6) With both teams ranked in the top 10 and Washington playing in front of
a fired up capacity crowd, what are the Tree faithfull’s expectations for
Friday night? Any change in the difficulty of this game from Stanford’s
perspective after UW’s struggles with Arizona a week ago?

6. I think there's a general feeling that Washington hasn't really done anything impressive yet. Of course, that doesn't mean that they aren't deserving of all their accolades, and they could still be the best team in the North, but it's still early. If I were to guess, I'd say the Huskies' struggles with Arizona could've had something to do with this game. This is probably the team's biggest game in years, so I'd understand if they were looking past the Wildcats.

7) What is your prediction for this game?

7. It's hard for me to pick against the Cardinal, and I'm not going to start now. The defensive has just been so impressive. Kansas State might be a middle of the pack Big 12 team and USC might be spiraling, but both of those teams are talented, and UCLA has one of the top quarterbacks in the conference. None of those teams managed more than a touchdown against the Stanford defense, and I think Washington will struggle as well. On offense, I think we'll see a bit more of the playbook on Friday night. There was talk about how much that game-winning drive might do for Burns's confidence, but what could be more important is that it might've done a lot for the coaches' confidence in Burns. This is a kid who can make all the throws, and with the Husky defense geared towards stopping McCaffrey (how could it not be?), Burns will have some opportunities. I'm going to take Stanford with a 24-13 win.

[Hank 91]

Continued... (I exceeded the Board's character limit, apparently.)

4) How would you rate the special teams and the Cardinal kicking game? Any
good return men? Yep, we made you wait this long to gush about #5.

It's interesting to see how teams approach Christian McCaffrey as a kick returner. So far they've been avoiding him, but there's a price to be paid for that. Punters are good enough nowadays to angle the ball towards the sideline and limit any punt returner, but the only to limit McCaffrey on kickoffs is to kick it short. As a result, the Stanford offense is typically starting at the 35-yard line. Even with all of McCaffrey's success last season, I can't imagine their average drive starting spot was that high. Over the course of the season, this is a good thing for the Cardinal, but I think opposing coaches realize that if they can get through a game without watching him take one to the house, it's a good thing for them. I look forward to seeing how the Washington coaches choose to handle things on Friday night.

As for the rest of the special teams, kicker Conrad Ukropina and punter Jake Bailey have been brobdingnagian strengths. Ukropina has made some big kicks in his time, most notably a game-winning 45-yarder last season at the buzzer to beat Notre Dame, but his strength is his consistency. I've been watching Stanford football for almost thirty years now, and I can't remember being more confident in any other kicker. He only missed two field goals last season, and even though one of them was important (a 43-yarder in Stanford's two-point loss to Oregon), he's about as good as it gets at the college level. You can say the same thing for Jake Bailey. He's averaging 45.3 yards per punt, which is only fifth-best in the Pac-12, but he makes up for that with his accuracy. In the last two games he's placed three balls inside the two yard line. All in all, Stanford's special teams play is a clear strength.


5) DBs Alijah Holder and Quenton Meeks both went down with injuries in the
UCLA game. What is their status for the game? Any other injury concerns for
Stanford?

Coaches don't like to talk about injuries, but David Shaw takes this to an extreme. We never here anything, so my guess is as good as yours. We know that wide receiver Francis Owusu is definitely out after suffering a concussion against UCLA, but all we have about Meeks and Holder, the two starting cornerbacks, is that they might play, or they might not. This is a big loss, but not nearly as big as it would've been a few years ago. Never before has Stanford been as deep at this position. Meeks and Holder went out early last week, forcing backups Alameen Murphy and Terrance Alexander to come in against Josh Rosen and the UCLA passing attack. They more than held their own, as UCLA's only touchdown came before the injuries.


6) With both teams ranked in the top 10 and Washington playing in front of
a fired up capacity crowd, what are the Tree faithfull’s expectations for
Friday night? Any change in the difficulty of this game from Stanford’s
perspective after UW’s struggles with Arizona a week ago?

6. I think there's a general feeling that Washington hasn't really done anything impressive yet. Of course, that doesn't mean that they aren't deserving of all their accolades, and they could still be the best team in the North, but it's still early. If I were to guess, I'd say the Huskies' struggles with Arizona could've had something to do with this game. This is probably the team's biggest game in years, so I'd understand if they were looking past the Wildcats.

7) What is your prediction for this game?

7. It's hard for me to pick against the Cardinal, and I'm not going to start now. The defensive has just been so impressive. Kansas State might be a middle of the pack Big 12 team and USC might be spiraling, but both of those teams are talented, and UCLA has one of the top quarterbacks in the conference. None of those teams managed more than a touchdown against the Stanford defense, and I think Washington will struggle as well. On offense, I think we'll see a bit more of the playbook on Friday night. There was talk about how much that game-winning drive might do for Burns's confidence, but what could be more important is that it might've done a lot for the coaches' confidence in Burns. This is a kid who can make all the throws, and with the Husky defense geared towards stopping McCaffrey (how could it not be?), Burns will have some opportunities. I'm going to take Stanford with a 24-13 win.

[Nan3cy]

Thanks Hank. Good stuff.

[Nan3cy]

Thanks Hank. Good stuff.

[Nan3cy]

Thanks Hank. Good stuff.

[Nan3cy]

Thanks Hank. Good stuff.

[Nan3cy]

Thanks Hank. Good stuff.

[Nan3cy]

Thanks Hank. Good stuff.

[larkinforever]

Very enjoyable read. Thanks very much for sharing, Hank.

[larkinforever]

Very enjoyable read. Thanks very much for sharing, Hank.

[larkinforever]

Very enjoyable read. Thanks very much for sharing, Hank.

[larkinforever]

Very enjoyable read. Thanks very much for sharing, Hank.

[larkinforever]

Very enjoyable read. Thanks very much for sharing, Hank.

[larkinforever]

Very enjoyable read. Thanks very much for sharing, Hank.