[OutsiderFan]

Could have knocked me over with a feather when I saw Pollack pick Stanford to win the Pac-12 and go to the CFB Playoff on ESPN just now.

He had:

1. Alabama
2. Ohio State
3. Stanford
4. Clemson

[OutsiderFan]

Could have knocked me over with a feather when I saw Pollack pick Stanford to win the Pac-12 and go to the CFB Playoff on ESPN just now.

He had:

1. Alabama
2. Ohio State
3. Stanford
4. Clemson

[dabigv13]

It is surprising, but the guy is probably the dumbest ESPN commentator, or at least in the discussion. I'll hold off on ordering my playoff tickets for now.

[dabigv13]

It is surprising, but the guy is probably the dumbest ESPN commentator, or at least in the discussion. I'll hold off on ordering my playoff tickets for now.

[Redrum]

And he definitely has been drinking. Beat USC, Notre Dame and UDUB and this is worth visiting again.

[Redrum]

And he definitely has been drinking. Beat USC, Notre Dame and UDUB and this is worth visiting again.

[socalstanfan1]

Of course, one of the main goals of these commentators is to spark controversy and drive up visits to their article.  And here we are, discussing his column.

Maybe he's not so dumb...

[socalstanfan1]

Of course, one of the main goals of these commentators is to spark controversy and drive up visits to their article.  And here we are, discussing his column.

Maybe he's not so dumb...

[OutsiderFan]

I wasn't aware Pollack wrote a column for ESPN.  I do know he is a member of the College Gameday crew.  Most fans would see some cause for optimism after a professional analyst picks their team to be in the CFB Playoff.  Calling a guy dumb for picking your team to win its conference, well that's something I've never seen before.

[OutsiderFan]

I wasn't aware Pollack wrote a column for ESPN.  I do know he is a member of the College Gameday crew.  Most fans would see some cause for optimism after a professional analyst picks their team to be in the CFB Playoff.  Calling a guy dumb for picking your team to win its conference, well that's something I've never seen before.

[pcgoode]

Pollack has been not a bad observer of the PAC 12 (at least what I've seen him say about it) over the last few years. He has been tweeting about his prediction today, and he seems to favour our OL and DL over USC's and says Trojans have a very tough schedule. He hasn't mentioned much about UW, except that he wouldn't be surprised if the Huskies made it instead of the Cardinal.

[pcgoode]

Pollack has been not a bad observer of the PAC 12 (at least what I've seen him say about it) over the last few years. He has been tweeting about his prediction today, and he seems to favour our OL and DL over USC's and says Trojans have a very tough schedule. He hasn't mentioned much about UW, except that he wouldn't be surprised if the Huskies made it instead of the Cardinal.

[dabigv13]

I wasn't aware Pollack wrote a column for ESPN.  I do know he is a member of the College Gameday crew.  Most fans would see some cause for optimism after a professional analyst picks their team to be in the CFB Playoff.  Calling a guy dumb for picking your team to win its conference, well that's something I've never seen before.

No, no, no. I'm saying he's dumb, and so I don't put any stock in his prediction, and am not going to get too jazzed about it. But hey, at least some good national press.

[dabigv13]

I wasn't aware Pollack wrote a column for ESPN.  I do know he is a member of the College Gameday crew.  Most fans would see some cause for optimism after a professional analyst picks their team to be in the CFB Playoff.  Calling a guy dumb for picking your team to win its conference, well that's something I've never seen before.

No, no, no. I'm saying he's dumb, and so I don't put any stock in his prediction, and am not going to get too jazzed about it. But hey, at least some good national press.

[Hank 91]

Of course, one of the main goals of these commentators is to spark controversy and drive up visits to their article.  And here we are, discussing his column.

Maybe he's not so dumb...

If you look at his Twitter stream, he admits at much in a response to a question about why he chose Stanford over Washington:

https://twitter.com/davidpollack47/statu...7527067648

[Hank 91]

Of course, one of the main goals of these commentators is to spark controversy and drive up visits to their article.  And here we are, discussing his column.

Maybe he's not so dumb...

If you look at his Twitter stream, he admits at much in a response to a question about why he chose Stanford over Washington:

https://twitter.com/davidpollack47/statu...7527067648

[ColoradoTree]

Interesting that he seems to favor Stanford now (or at least sees the possibility, per the tweet Hank noted), after what seems like years of picking against us and downplaying our accomplishments. 

I've been conditioned to ignore what this guy says for years because of his seeming inability to recognize any quality teams outside the SEC, so I'll hold off on getting my hopes up until I hear smarter commentators and analysts make similar predictions.  Right now, it's hard to say that anyone in the North has earned the right to be picked over Washington, so it doesn't bother me a bit to see most folks saying we'll come in second in the North.  That's as it should be--for now.  We could win the North, and I'm sure our guys are champing at the bit to get their shot at Washington on November 10, but it's their spot right now, so we need to go take it from them. 

(With all that said, it still feels good for national folks to say nice things about us. That will never get old.)

[ColoradoTree]

Interesting that he seems to favor Stanford now (or at least sees the possibility, per the tweet Hank noted), after what seems like years of picking against us and downplaying our accomplishments. 

I've been conditioned to ignore what this guy says for years because of his seeming inability to recognize any quality teams outside the SEC, so I'll hold off on getting my hopes up until I hear smarter commentators and analysts make similar predictions.  Right now, it's hard to say that anyone in the North has earned the right to be picked over Washington, so it doesn't bother me a bit to see most folks saying we'll come in second in the North.  That's as it should be--for now.  We could win the North, and I'm sure our guys are champing at the bit to get their shot at Washington on November 10, but it's their spot right now, so we need to go take it from them. 

(With all that said, it still feels good for national folks to say nice things about us. That will never get old.)

[fullmetal]

Feels kind of weird to have a perennial naysayer rooting for your team.  There's gotta be an angle here...

Every year there's a lot of sentiment on this board about preferring to play with chips on the shoulder and being the underdog, but let's face it: to make it to the final four, it's more often than not helpful to start in the vicinity.

[fullmetal]

Feels kind of weird to have a perennial naysayer rooting for your team.  There's gotta be an angle here...

Every year there's a lot of sentiment on this board about preferring to play with chips on the shoulder and being the underdog, but let's face it: to make it to the final four, it's more often than not helpful to start in the vicinity.

[ColoradoTree]

Feels kind of weird to have a perennial naysayer rooting for your team.  There's gotta be an angle here...

Every year there's a lot of sentiment on this board about preferring to play with chips on the shoulder and being the underdog, but let's face it: to make it to the final four, it's more often than not helpful to start in the vicinity.

Certainly true. This year feels like a good mix of both, because we are generally seen as the underdog (and rightly so, in my view), but we're also Top 15, which is close enough to the vicinity to put us there if we take care of business.  A win at SC in Week 2 and I should think we'll be Top 10 for sure, and knocking on the door of the Top 5.  Having three Top 15 teams in the conference in the preseason poll is great news for whichever team comes out on top. 

[ColoradoTree]

Feels kind of weird to have a perennial naysayer rooting for your team.  There's gotta be an angle here...

Every year there's a lot of sentiment on this board about preferring to play with chips on the shoulder and being the underdog, but let's face it: to make it to the final four, it's more often than not helpful to start in the vicinity.

Certainly true. This year feels like a good mix of both, because we are generally seen as the underdog (and rightly so, in my view), but we're also Top 15, which is close enough to the vicinity to put us there if we take care of business.  A win at SC in Week 2 and I should think we'll be Top 10 for sure, and knocking on the door of the Top 5.  Having three Top 15 teams in the conference in the preseason poll is great news for whichever team comes out on top. 

[Hank 91]

[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=17136.msg196786#msg196786 date=1502295453]
Feels kind of weird to have a perennial naysayer rooting for your team.  There's gotta be an angle here...

Every year there's a lot of sentiment on this board about preferring to play with chips on the shoulder and being the underdog, but let's face it: to make it to the final four, it's more often than not helpful to start in the vicinity.

Certainly true. This year feels like a good mix of both, because we are generally seen as the underdog (and rightly so, in my view), but we're also Top 15, which is close enough to the vicinity to put us there if we take care of business.  A win at SC in Week 2 and I should think we'll be Top 10 for sure, and knocking on the door of the Top 5.  Having three Top 15 teams in the conference in the preseason poll is great news for whichever team comes out on top.
[/quote]

Here's something that jumped out at me from this year's media guide. There's a section with yearly performance against top-25 teams; typically three to five games in recent years. Last year? Just one. Washington. (This obviously means ranking at the time of the game, but still.)

[Hank 91]

[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=17136.msg196786#msg196786 date=1502295453]
Feels kind of weird to have a perennial naysayer rooting for your team.  There's gotta be an angle here...

Every year there's a lot of sentiment on this board about preferring to play with chips on the shoulder and being the underdog, but let's face it: to make it to the final four, it's more often than not helpful to start in the vicinity.

Certainly true. This year feels like a good mix of both, because we are generally seen as the underdog (and rightly so, in my view), but we're also Top 15, which is close enough to the vicinity to put us there if we take care of business.  A win at SC in Week 2 and I should think we'll be Top 10 for sure, and knocking on the door of the Top 5.  Having three Top 15 teams in the conference in the preseason poll is great news for whichever team comes out on top.
[/quote]

Here's something that jumped out at me from this year's media guide. There's a section with yearly performance against top-25 teams; typically three to five games in recent years. Last year? Just one. Washington. (This obviously means ranking at the time of the game, but still.)

[Bruce Wang]

As much as I'd like us to be the surprise participant in the playoffs, I doubt it.  If I had to put money down on a dark horse for the playoffs, it would be Texas.

[Bruce Wang]

As much as I'd like us to be the surprise participant in the playoffs, I doubt it.  If I had to put money down on a dark horse for the playoffs, it would be Texas.

[CTcard]

Feels kind of weird to have a perennial naysayer rooting for your team.  There's gotta be an angle here...

If somebody picks a team, it does not mean they are rooting for the team.
If somebody picks against a team, it does not mean they are rooting against the team.

The only angles here would appear to be 1) Pollack thinks Stanford has a chance to be top notch (which is true, if certainly no lock), and 2) Pollack apparently wants to pick a team that doesn't simply match what everybody else is doing (which seems reasonable as long as one doesn't go too far for the cause).

[CTcard]

Feels kind of weird to have a perennial naysayer rooting for your team.  There's gotta be an angle here...

If somebody picks a team, it does not mean they are rooting for the team.
If somebody picks against a team, it does not mean they are rooting against the team.

The only angles here would appear to be 1) Pollack thinks Stanford has a chance to be top notch (which is true, if certainly no lock), and 2) Pollack apparently wants to pick a team that doesn't simply match what everybody else is doing (which seems reasonable as long as one doesn't go too far for the cause).

[Treebound]

I read it as Pollack knows that he has a rep for being less intelligent than the other commentators on Game Day.  He also knows that he has a reputation as being an SEC hack.    Stanford has won more Pac12 titles than any other team, and we are known as "Nerd Nation."  Why not pick Stanford?!

  He's typically picked against us...to the point that I thought maybe he had a Door #1 issue.  So this pick makes him look "smart" by identifying with Stanford.  I'm biased, but I think we have an equal shot to win the P12 vs UW or Sc.    I like the pick, just like I was happy with his Game Day colleague picking us 2 years ago (I think).  It's good publicity and we deserve the recognition given our performance since the Greatest Upset Ever.   

Bring on the season! 

[Treebound]

I read it as Pollack knows that he has a rep for being less intelligent than the other commentators on Game Day.  He also knows that he has a reputation as being an SEC hack.    Stanford has won more Pac12 titles than any other team, and we are known as "Nerd Nation."  Why not pick Stanford?!

  He's typically picked against us...to the point that I thought maybe he had a Door #1 issue.  So this pick makes him look "smart" by identifying with Stanford.  I'm biased, but I think we have an equal shot to win the P12 vs UW or Sc.    I like the pick, just like I was happy with his Game Day colleague picking us 2 years ago (I think).  It's good publicity and we deserve the recognition given our performance since the Greatest Upset Ever.   

Bring on the season! 

[ADPATERSON]

W-T-H, Pollack is taking a shot by betting on a solid Coaching staff that since 2009 has PROVEN that it can reload.
All the pyscho-phant pundits want Meyer vs Saban in the FINALE rather than the Semi.  The hype would be brobdingnagian.
So, pick OKLA to pull the upset in Columbus, and Stanford slides in with a favorable schedule. 
Add PNST who showed they could knock off OHST last year, and put on a helluva show in a shootout Rose Bowl. 

With our home slate and boffo Strength-of-schedule, STAN can drive itself to the Playoff Party.
If we win, we're in, because of the slate.  Maybe a dozen other teams can say that and have the horses to do it.
Look, with the Power Confs and early monster matchups, we essentially already have an 8-team Playoff. 
Here are the "PLAY-IN" games -- winners get inside track to a Playoff slot (using SI rankings):
Sept 2:  #1 BAMA vs #2 FLST @ATL stadium -- This is an early Championship game with a LOT of 5* HS talent.
Sept 9:  #6 OKLA @ #3 OHST -- Mayfield vs Barrett in a QB duel for the Hizeman.  Riley as OC moved up for OKLA.
Sept 9:  #15 STAN @ #5 U$C -- Darnold (First round NFL next year) gunning it against our #1 DBs in Pac12.
Sept. 23:  #7 CLEM @ #14 LOUV -- What can Lamar Jackson do, coming back as a stiff-arming trophy winner?
Nov  10:  #9 WASH @ #15 STAN -- If both teams are undefeated (or we are 8-1), then this is for Pac12 North.
Nov 25:    NDAM @ STAN -- In 2015, the late FG Nuke by Uke killed Domer hopes for a Playoff spot. 
Some of the other Conf champ games may not have as much sway as the Pac12 champ game.

So, Final Four pickings might actually be narrow given the Oligopoly in College Football: 
1) BAMA vs FLST winner, if they only stumble once til Dec. after the Opener. 
2) OHST vs OKLA winner [Imagine Buckeyes losing to Sooners, and then rolling through the B1G]
3) Pac12 champ (with just one loss):  STAN over U$C  ...Note:  the arid South Div has NEVER won the Pac12. 
4) MICH or PNST, if B1G champ? Yes.  Brides-maid:  CLEM vs LOUV winner, if undefeated?
    I don't see Texas as proven yet for a dark horse.  #8 NitLions with QB McSorley and RB Barkley look potent.

[ADPATERSON]

W-T-H, Pollack is taking a shot by betting on a solid Coaching staff that since 2009 has PROVEN that it can reload.
All the pyscho-phant pundits want Meyer vs Saban in the FINALE rather than the Semi.  The hype would be brobdingnagian.
So, pick OKLA to pull the upset in Columbus, and Stanford slides in with a favorable schedule. 
Add PNST who showed they could knock off OHST last year, and put on a helluva show in a shootout Rose Bowl. 

With our home slate and boffo Strength-of-schedule, STAN can drive itself to the Playoff Party.
If we win, we're in, because of the slate.  Maybe a dozen other teams can say that and have the horses to do it.
Look, with the Power Confs and early monster matchups, we essentially already have an 8-team Playoff. 
Here are the "PLAY-IN" games -- winners get inside track to a Playoff slot (using SI rankings):
Sept 2:  #1 BAMA vs #2 FLST @ATL stadium -- This is an early Championship game with a LOT of 5* HS talent.
Sept 9:  #6 OKLA @ #3 OHST -- Mayfield vs Barrett in a QB duel for the Hizeman.  Riley as OC moved up for OKLA.
Sept 9:  #15 STAN @ #5 U$C -- Darnold (First round NFL next year) gunning it against our #1 DBs in Pac12.
Sept. 23:  #7 CLEM @ #14 LOUV -- What can Lamar Jackson do, coming back as a stiff-arming trophy winner?
Nov  10:  #9 WASH @ #15 STAN -- If both teams are undefeated (or we are 8-1), then this is for Pac12 North.
Nov 25:    NDAM @ STAN -- In 2015, the late FG Nuke by Uke killed Domer hopes for a Playoff spot. 
Some of the other Conf champ games may not have as much sway as the Pac12 champ game.

So, Final Four pickings might actually be narrow given the Oligopoly in College Football: 
1) BAMA vs FLST winner, if they only stumble once til Dec. after the Opener. 
2) OHST vs OKLA winner [Imagine Buckeyes losing to Sooners, and then rolling through the B1G]
3) Pac12 champ (with just one loss):  STAN over U$C  ...Note:  the arid South Div has NEVER won the Pac12. 
4) MICH or PNST, if B1G champ? Yes.  Brides-maid:  CLEM vs LOUV winner, if undefeated?
    I don't see Texas as proven yet for a dark horse.  #8 NitLions with QB McSorley and RB Barkley look potent.

[fullmetal]

I'll have what he's having 8)

Yeah don't buy Texas this season.  New coach, prior stint at UH, inheriting a not-great situation.  Bullish on Stanford.

[fullmetal]

I'll have what he's having 8)

Yeah don't buy Texas this season.  New coach, prior stint at UH, inheriting a not-great situation.  Bullish on Stanford.