09-05-2017, 05:14 PM
Stanford - 34
USCÂ Â Â - 24
USCÂ Â Â - 24
Stanford - USC predictions contest
09-05-2017, 06:46 PM
Posting on behalf of eric/lsju84:
(and entered it in the form on his behalf)
BC
Quote:Good Guys 24
the other team 20
(and entered it in the form on his behalf)
BC
Posting on behalf of eric/lsju84:
(and entered it in the form on his behalf)
BC
Quote:Good Guys 24
the other team 20
(and entered it in the form on his behalf)
BC
09-05-2017, 07:54 PM
(09-05-2017, 03:02 PM)ColoradoTree link Wrote:Stanford 34
SC 30
... SC actually leading going into the half, 20-17. SC extends the lead to 23-17 coming out of the break, but Stanford answers right back with a long touchdown drive to take a 24-23 lead. SC is forced to punt, and Stanford is able to extend the lead to 27-23 on a drive that started explosively but stalled in the red zone, forcing us to settle for a 32-yard Toner FG. We trade a couple of unsuccessful drives before SC retakes the lead 30-27 in the fourth quarter. With the chips down, and the eyes of the nation turned to us (after the other high profile games conclude), Chryst leads a masterfully-called go-ahead drive where our game-long commitment to the run game pays dividends, with Love getting steady gains, Chryst finding Irwin for key conversions, and ultimately, a go-ahead TD to Schultz on 3rd and 2 in the red zone (off play action, and out of a jumbo set, to our collective delight). We're up 34-30, but there's a problem: we left too much darn time left on the clock, and Darnold has 1:30 (though no timeouts) to try and get a game-winning score. He almost does it, moving the ball quickly to midfield and beyond to the point that SC has the ball at our 20 with 20 seconds left. They spike the clock on first down to get a chance to talk over what to do next. The pass is incomplete on second and 10 (00:15 remaining). On 3rd and 10, Darnold floats a dime inside the 5 for a first down, but it's called back on a clear holding penalty to keep Phillips from sacking Darnold (SC fans whine about the call, but as the commentators point out on the replay, Phillips basically gets tackled--it's an easy call to make). What looked to be 1st and goal is now 3rd and 20 on the 30 with 7 seconds remaining. Darnold makes all of our hearts stop by first evading not one but two sacks, and then lofting a pass to the end zone. It's on target to a WR crossing in the back of the end zone who has a step on Holder, but the pressure means that Darnold doesn't see Justin Reid, who jumps in front of the pass and seals the win with the interception as the clock hits zeroes.
That's a lot of detail - did you major in divination?
BC will have to change the rules to favour individual play calls in cases of ties in calling the score.
(09-05-2017, 03:02 PM)ColoradoTree link Wrote:Stanford 34
SC 30
... SC actually leading going into the half, 20-17. SC extends the lead to 23-17 coming out of the break, but Stanford answers right back with a long touchdown drive to take a 24-23 lead. SC is forced to punt, and Stanford is able to extend the lead to 27-23 on a drive that started explosively but stalled in the red zone, forcing us to settle for a 32-yard Toner FG. We trade a couple of unsuccessful drives before SC retakes the lead 30-27 in the fourth quarter. With the chips down, and the eyes of the nation turned to us (after the other high profile games conclude), Chryst leads a masterfully-called go-ahead drive where our game-long commitment to the run game pays dividends, with Love getting steady gains, Chryst finding Irwin for key conversions, and ultimately, a go-ahead TD to Schultz on 3rd and 2 in the red zone (off play action, and out of a jumbo set, to our collective delight). We're up 34-30, but there's a problem: we left too much darn time left on the clock, and Darnold has 1:30 (though no timeouts) to try and get a game-winning score. He almost does it, moving the ball quickly to midfield and beyond to the point that SC has the ball at our 20 with 20 seconds left. They spike the clock on first down to get a chance to talk over what to do next. The pass is incomplete on second and 10 (00:15 remaining). On 3rd and 10, Darnold floats a dime inside the 5 for a first down, but it's called back on a clear holding penalty to keep Phillips from sacking Darnold (SC fans whine about the call, but as the commentators point out on the replay, Phillips basically gets tackled--it's an easy call to make). What looked to be 1st and goal is now 3rd and 20 on the 30 with 7 seconds remaining. Darnold makes all of our hearts stop by first evading not one but two sacks, and then lofting a pass to the end zone. It's on target to a WR crossing in the back of the end zone who has a step on Holder, but the pressure means that Darnold doesn't see Justin Reid, who jumps in front of the pass and seals the win with the interception as the clock hits zeroes.
That's a lot of detail - did you major in divination?
BC will have to change the rules to favour individual play calls in cases of ties in calling the score.
It's interesting that there's a wide range of predictions here, from a 1 point margin to a 40 point one. I just finished watching the SC-Western Michigan game, and I join the optimistic camp.
I still think SC *could* be a behemoth late in the season, but based on what I saw in weeks 0-1, the stars are looking nicely aligned for Stanford this week.
Some key, mostly favorable matchups:
1) It looks like one of SC's weaknesses is their run defense, and Stanford's run offense looks like it might one of the great ones. The Western Michigan running game got a lot of yards after contact, with rugby scrum-style running, and Stanford is Scrum U. People are talking about Bryce Love, but if Cameron Scarlett is who I think he is this season, this game could be his big introduction to the national stage.
2) I was really impressed with how quickly and decisively Darnold read the defense and pinpointed the point to attack -- it did remind me of Luck. But remember -- Luck was particularly adept at winning the games Stanford should win -- finding the best matchup and target, but the Luck offense could struggle when there was no easy weakness to pinpoint, and that's what I hope Darnold will be facing.
3) Three of SC's starting defensive backs (from their Nickel Package) are listed at 5'11". Stanford's starting tight ends and receivers are 6'2", 6'3", 6'6" and 6'7", with more big bodies in reserve. The height matchups are going to be fun all season, but SC generally seems to lack height in their secondary.
4) In week 1, USC's O Line looked like it's still getting things together, which is fortunate timing for Stanford.
5) SC's defense looks to be in early season SC form, and, as touched upon several times, there's an insane number of permutations Stanford's offense *might* be coming out with, which would be hard to plan for and cover even for an end-of-season, veteran defense. Stanford should be able to put up a lot of points.
6) Western Michigan kept SC's score low for the vast majority of the game. While SC pulled ahead by 18 in the end, by my eyes, it was because Western Michigan just looked gassed.
I think SC scored 21 points in Q1-Q3 because Darnold is very good, because Western Michigan got caught many times by formation shifts (which Stanford should *not* be), because their receivers are athletic and block well, and because sometimes the Western Michigan secondary gave ridiculously large, "gimme" cushions (which I do *not* expect from Stanford's secondary). Late in the game, Western Michigan looked gassed, lost their physical nature, and tackled poorly, which should never apply to the Men in Cardinal.
Stanford 48-USC 28
I still think SC *could* be a behemoth late in the season, but based on what I saw in weeks 0-1, the stars are looking nicely aligned for Stanford this week.
Some key, mostly favorable matchups:
1) It looks like one of SC's weaknesses is their run defense, and Stanford's run offense looks like it might one of the great ones. The Western Michigan running game got a lot of yards after contact, with rugby scrum-style running, and Stanford is Scrum U. People are talking about Bryce Love, but if Cameron Scarlett is who I think he is this season, this game could be his big introduction to the national stage.
2) I was really impressed with how quickly and decisively Darnold read the defense and pinpointed the point to attack -- it did remind me of Luck. But remember -- Luck was particularly adept at winning the games Stanford should win -- finding the best matchup and target, but the Luck offense could struggle when there was no easy weakness to pinpoint, and that's what I hope Darnold will be facing.
3) Three of SC's starting defensive backs (from their Nickel Package) are listed at 5'11". Stanford's starting tight ends and receivers are 6'2", 6'3", 6'6" and 6'7", with more big bodies in reserve. The height matchups are going to be fun all season, but SC generally seems to lack height in their secondary.
4) In week 1, USC's O Line looked like it's still getting things together, which is fortunate timing for Stanford.
5) SC's defense looks to be in early season SC form, and, as touched upon several times, there's an insane number of permutations Stanford's offense *might* be coming out with, which would be hard to plan for and cover even for an end-of-season, veteran defense. Stanford should be able to put up a lot of points.
6) Western Michigan kept SC's score low for the vast majority of the game. While SC pulled ahead by 18 in the end, by my eyes, it was because Western Michigan just looked gassed.
I think SC scored 21 points in Q1-Q3 because Darnold is very good, because Western Michigan got caught many times by formation shifts (which Stanford should *not* be), because their receivers are athletic and block well, and because sometimes the Western Michigan secondary gave ridiculously large, "gimme" cushions (which I do *not* expect from Stanford's secondary). Late in the game, Western Michigan looked gassed, lost their physical nature, and tackled poorly, which should never apply to the Men in Cardinal.
Stanford 48-USC 28
(This post was last modified: 09-06-2017, 02:51 PM by Snorlax94.)
It's interesting that there's a wide range of predictions here, from a 1 point margin to a 40 point one. I just finished watching the SC-Western Michigan game, and I join the optimistic camp.
I still think SC *could* be a behemoth late in the season, but based on what I saw in weeks 0-1, the stars are looking nicely aligned for Stanford this week.
Some key, mostly favorable matchups:
1) It looks like one of SC's weaknesses is their run defense, and Stanford's run offense looks like it might one of the great ones. The Western Michigan running game got a lot of yards after contact, with rugby scrum-style running, and Stanford is Scrum U. People are talking about Bryce Love, but if Cameron Scarlett is who I think he is this season, this game could be his big introduction to the national stage.
2) I was really impressed with how quickly and decisively Darnold read the defense and pinpointed the point to attack -- it did remind me of Luck. But remember -- Luck was particularly adept at winning the games Stanford should win -- finding the best matchup and target, but the Luck offense could struggle when there was no easy weakness to pinpoint, and that's what I hope Darnold will be facing.
3) Three of SC's starting defensive backs (from their Nickel Package) are listed at 5'11". Stanford's starting tight ends and receivers are 6'2", 6'3", 6'6" and 6'7", with more big bodies in reserve. The height matchups are going to be fun all season, but SC generally seems to lack height in their secondary.
4) In week 1, USC's O Line looked like it's still getting things together, which is fortunate timing for Stanford.
5) SC's defense looks to be in early season SC form, and, as touched upon several times, there's an insane number of permutations Stanford's offense *might* be coming out with, which would be hard to plan for and cover even for an end-of-season, veteran defense. Stanford should be able to put up a lot of points.
6) Western Michigan kept SC's score low for the vast majority of the game. While SC pulled ahead by 18 in the end, by my eyes, it was because Western Michigan just looked gassed.
I think SC scored 21 points in Q1-Q3 because Darnold is very good, because Western Michigan got caught many times by formation shifts (which Stanford should *not* be), because their receivers are athletic and block well, and because sometimes the Western Michigan secondary gave ridiculously large, "gimme" cushions (which I do *not* expect from Stanford's secondary). Late in the game, Western Michigan looked gassed, lost their physical nature, and tackled poorly, which should never apply to the Men in Cardinal.
Stanford 48-USC 28
I still think SC *could* be a behemoth late in the season, but based on what I saw in weeks 0-1, the stars are looking nicely aligned for Stanford this week.
Some key, mostly favorable matchups:
1) It looks like one of SC's weaknesses is their run defense, and Stanford's run offense looks like it might one of the great ones. The Western Michigan running game got a lot of yards after contact, with rugby scrum-style running, and Stanford is Scrum U. People are talking about Bryce Love, but if Cameron Scarlett is who I think he is this season, this game could be his big introduction to the national stage.
2) I was really impressed with how quickly and decisively Darnold read the defense and pinpointed the point to attack -- it did remind me of Luck. But remember -- Luck was particularly adept at winning the games Stanford should win -- finding the best matchup and target, but the Luck offense could struggle when there was no easy weakness to pinpoint, and that's what I hope Darnold will be facing.
3) Three of SC's starting defensive backs (from their Nickel Package) are listed at 5'11". Stanford's starting tight ends and receivers are 6'2", 6'3", 6'6" and 6'7", with more big bodies in reserve. The height matchups are going to be fun all season, but SC generally seems to lack height in their secondary.
4) In week 1, USC's O Line looked like it's still getting things together, which is fortunate timing for Stanford.
5) SC's defense looks to be in early season SC form, and, as touched upon several times, there's an insane number of permutations Stanford's offense *might* be coming out with, which would be hard to plan for and cover even for an end-of-season, veteran defense. Stanford should be able to put up a lot of points.
6) Western Michigan kept SC's score low for the vast majority of the game. While SC pulled ahead by 18 in the end, by my eyes, it was because Western Michigan just looked gassed.
I think SC scored 21 points in Q1-Q3 because Darnold is very good, because Western Michigan got caught many times by formation shifts (which Stanford should *not* be), because their receivers are athletic and block well, and because sometimes the Western Michigan secondary gave ridiculously large, "gimme" cushions (which I do *not* expect from Stanford's secondary). Late in the game, Western Michigan looked gassed, lost their physical nature, and tackled poorly, which should never apply to the Men in Cardinal.
Stanford 48-USC 28
09-06-2017, 07:40 AM
(09-05-2017, 07:54 PM)CTcard link Wrote:That's a lot of detail - did you major in divination?
BC will have to change the rules to favour individual play calls in cases of ties in calling the score.
Professor Trelawney did always say I had a knack for it.
But seriously, I generally do terribly in this predictions game. If I think it's a close game, it's a blowout, and if I think it's a blowout, it's close. So, here's hoping I'm wrong and we win comfortably, eh?
(09-05-2017, 07:54 PM)CTcard link Wrote:That's a lot of detail - did you major in divination?
BC will have to change the rules to favour individual play calls in cases of ties in calling the score.
Professor Trelawney did always say I had a knack for it.
But seriously, I generally do terribly in this predictions game. If I think it's a close game, it's a blowout, and if I think it's a blowout, it's close. So, here's hoping I'm wrong and we win comfortably, eh?
09-06-2017, 01:19 PM
Jim Plunkett - 38
Todd Marinovich - 31
Todd Marinovich - 31
"It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you think you know that just isn't so."
Mark Twain
09-07-2017, 08:37 PM
Bump! Looks like we're still a few predictions shy of last week!
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
09-07-2017, 09:16 PM
Stanford scores standing up 37
Troyens stumble for 31
Troyens stumble for 31
Just love slamming those over-hyped beach body schools.
If you heard Cal Sucks, you'd be right.
Stanford scores standing up 37
Troyens stumble for 31
Troyens stumble for 31
Just love slamming those over-hyped beach body schools.
If you heard Cal Sucks, you'd be right.
09-07-2017, 11:04 PM
Stanford 37
University of Spoiled Children 24
Sad to hear our beloved LSJUMB will not be playing at half time. Too much good material that will not be leveraged this year. I hope they at least bring some great costumes!Â
University of Spoiled Children 24
Sad to hear our beloved LSJUMB will not be playing at half time. Too much good material that will not be leveraged this year. I hope they at least bring some great costumes!Â
09-07-2017, 11:52 PM
My school - 30
My idiot brother's adopted semi-pro team - 24
Cheers,
Pete F.
My idiot brother's adopted semi-pro team - 24
Cheers,
Pete F.
My school - 30
My idiot brother's adopted semi-pro team - 24
Cheers,
Pete F.
My idiot brother's adopted semi-pro team - 24
Cheers,
Pete F.
09-08-2017, 02:33 PM
(09-08-2017, 03:19 PM)hayaka link Wrote:National Accelerator Lab: 38
Museum of Jurassic Technology 27
Welcome Hayaka! +1 for your first prediction of a Cardinal win.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
(09-08-2017, 03:19 PM)hayaka link Wrote:National Accelerator Lab: 38
Museum of Jurassic Technology 27
Welcome Hayaka! +1 for your first prediction of a Cardinal win.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »