[BostonCard]

Sam Darnold just committed 17th turnover of the year with that fumble.  Stanford, as a team, has 8.

BC

[BostonCard]

Sam Darnold just committed 17th turnover of the year with that fumble.  Stanford, as a team, has 8.

BC

[d4cohn]

WSU just gave up another long TD run to an Arizona RB, where there wasn't even a defender in the camera frame for most of the run. If Love is healthy, based on the long runs I have seen tonight, he could have a field day on the ground.

[d4cohn]

WSU just gave up another long TD run to an Arizona RB, where there wasn't even a defender in the camera frame for most of the run. If Love is healthy, based on the long runs I have seen tonight, he could have a field day on the ground.

[washingtonismoney]

WSU just took a delay of game on a field goal attempt...then their kicker made a 56 yard kick. Still, wow.

[washingtonismoney]

WSU just took a delay of game on a field goal attempt...then their kicker made a 56 yard kick. Still, wow.

[d4cohn]

Another long TD run for Arizona, courtesy of Khalil Tate. Just hoping Love is healthy for a potentially favorable matchup.

[d4cohn]

Another long TD run for Arizona, courtesy of Khalil Tate. Just hoping Love is healthy for a potentially favorable matchup.

[BostonCard]

Also Helinski has thrown 3 interceptions.  So after bringing WSU to the lead, things are falling apart.

BC

[BostonCard]

Also Helinski has thrown 3 interceptions.  So after bringing WSU to the lead, things are falling apart.

BC

[d4cohn]

Also Helinski has thrown 3 interceptions.  So after bringing WSU to the lead, things are falling apart.

BC

Make that 4 interceptions, with a UA pick-six. Have no idea what Leach was thinking benching Falk, who could become the Pac-12 all-time leader in passing yards. Things are now really falling apart.

[d4cohn]

Also Helinski has thrown 3 interceptions.  So after bringing WSU to the lead, things are falling apart.

BC

Make that 4 interceptions, with a UA pick-six. Have no idea what Leach was thinking benching Falk, who could become the Pac-12 all-time leader in passing yards. Things are now really falling apart.

[BostonCard]

And Hilinski’s fourth interception is a pick six.  If my count is fit, when WSU gets the kickoff, it will be their 17th possession of the game.

BC

[BostonCard]

And Hilinski’s fourth interception is a pick six.  If my count is fit, when WSU gets the kickoff, it will be their 17th possession of the game.

BC

[thunder_chik]

Woohoo, Arizona leading 51-37 with under 10 minutes to go.

[thunder_chik]

Woohoo, Arizona leading 51-37 with under 10 minutes to go.

[OutsiderFan]

[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=17817.msg208969#msg208969 date=1509240962]
Remember when I took holy hell from this board for saying Utah was no big deal of a win?

You're a frickin' genius soothsayer. Happy now?
[/quote]

No.  I shouldn't have been ridiculed for saying what I did when I said it, regardless of whether or not I turned out to be right or not.

[OutsiderFan]

[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=17817.msg208969#msg208969 date=1509240962]
Remember when I took holy hell from this board for saying Utah was no big deal of a win?

You're a frickin' genius soothsayer. Happy now?
[/quote]

No.  I shouldn't have been ridiculed for saying what I did when I said it, regardless of whether or not I turned out to be right or not.

[BostonCard]

Did I hear the announcers right in the WSU game when they said that Falk will have to face “one of the better defenses in the PAC-12 in Stanford next week?”

BC

[BostonCard]

Did I hear the announcers right in the WSU game when they said that Falk will have to face “one of the better defenses in the PAC-12 in Stanford next week?”

BC

[OutsiderFan]

As WSU is going down, while giving up nearly 600 yards and 58+ points...

#14 WSU, #15 WSU, #16 MSU, and #18 USF all lose today.

[OutsiderFan]

As WSU is going down, while giving up nearly 600 yards and 58+ points...

#14 WSU, #15 WSU, #16 MSU, and #18 USF all lose today.

[ChicagoCard]

I wonder if SpokaneLee plans to listen to the Mike Leach postgame...

https://twitter.com/YahooDrSaturday/stat...2762593280

[ChicagoCard]

I wonder if SpokaneLee plans to listen to the Mike Leach postgame...

https://twitter.com/YahooDrSaturday/stat...2762593280

[Snorlax94]

Is there someplace I can watch the press conf live??

[Snorlax94]

Is there someplace I can watch the press conf live??

[JohnR34231]

This weekend sure shows you how useless comparative scores can be.
Kal whips Wazzu 37-3. Wazzu turns around and beats Colorado 28-0. Then Colorado beats Kal 44-28.
Since all those victories were at home, it's perhaps also a good demonstration of how important home field advantage is.

[JohnR34231]

This weekend sure shows you how useless comparative scores can be.
Kal whips Wazzu 37-3. Wazzu turns around and beats Colorado 28-0. Then Colorado beats Kal 44-28.
Since all those victories were at home, it's perhaps also a good demonstration of how important home field advantage is.

[stupac2]

[quote author=CowboyIndian link=topic=17817.msg209026#msg209026 date=1509249553]
[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=17817.msg208969#msg208969 date=1509240962]
Remember when I took holy hell from this board for saying Utah was no big deal of a win?

You're a frickin' genius soothsayer. Happy now?
[/quote]

No.  I shouldn't have been ridiculed for saying what I did when I said it, regardless of whether or not I turned out to be right or not.
[/quote]

My problem with your comment was that you were neglecting that Rice-Eccles is a tough place to play. If we had squeaked by Utah like that at home it would've been a pretty poor showing, but that win in their house is hardly a disaster (also of note: last night's game was in Autzen). This is even more true after our near-disaster against ORST, this team is just not very good on the road so any win on the road is a good one.

[stupac2]

[quote author=CowboyIndian link=topic=17817.msg209026#msg209026 date=1509249553]
[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=17817.msg208969#msg208969 date=1509240962]
Remember when I took holy hell from this board for saying Utah was no big deal of a win?

You're a frickin' genius soothsayer. Happy now?
[/quote]

No.  I shouldn't have been ridiculed for saying what I did when I said it, regardless of whether or not I turned out to be right or not.
[/quote]

My problem with your comment was that you were neglecting that Rice-Eccles is a tough place to play. If we had squeaked by Utah like that at home it would've been a pretty poor showing, but that win in their house is hardly a disaster (also of note: last night's game was in Autzen). This is even more true after our near-disaster against ORST, this team is just not very good on the road so any win on the road is a good one.

[OutsiderFan]

You mean the same Rice-Eccles in which ASU whipped Utah 30-10 the next game? 

Stanford struggled even worse than at Rice-Eccles, at a far worse Oregon State Reser Stadium, so should that be considered a quality win as well? 

Look, we all say things that are wrong, all the time.  And we all say things that are correct, all the time.  Just because I don't have the same level of pride in Stanford that most of you have as alums, doesn't make my takes on what Stanford does or doesn't do any less relevant. 

Stanford never, ever should have lost the last two games it played against Utah.  That doesn't make beating what could be a 4-8 Utah team worthy of praise this season, IMO.  Why the hell should I be attacked for stating my opinion, when the opinion itself doesn't attack anyone?  I could understand if I called people out personally, but I never do that.

[OutsiderFan]

You mean the same Rice-Eccles in which ASU whipped Utah 30-10 the next game? 

Stanford struggled even worse than at Rice-Eccles, at a far worse Oregon State Reser Stadium, so should that be considered a quality win as well? 

Look, we all say things that are wrong, all the time.  And we all say things that are correct, all the time.  Just because I don't have the same level of pride in Stanford that most of you have as alums, doesn't make my takes on what Stanford does or doesn't do any less relevant. 

Stanford never, ever should have lost the last two games it played against Utah.  That doesn't make beating what could be a 4-8 Utah team worthy of praise this season, IMO.  Why the hell should I be attacked for stating my opinion, when the opinion itself doesn't attack anyone?  I could understand if I called people out personally, but I never do that.

[stupac2]

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

Is anyone saying that?

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

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

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

[stupac2]

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

Is anyone saying that?

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

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

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

[Phogge]

Hey Stupac, what is your deal with Outsider? You have a "problem?" Perhaps state your position/argumentative assumption but "problem?" I thought this wasn't supposed to be Thunderdome where we bite the heads off of trolls and rib each other like HS sophs.

For example, it is just my opinion but I think some folks here take themselves and their opinions a bit too seriously. Overall a lack of humor abounds. But I don't have a problem with it or I'd adios myself. I just laugh a little and get on with it.

Outsider seems like a good guy and one of the extremely small cadre of non-Stanford people around here. But he's passionate about Stanford football and as I sit in Section 235 game after game and notice a half full stadium you guys need all the passionate fans you can muster. And my thoughts go back as far as a kid at his first Big Game in 1953. Love Stanford football, kind of neutral about the school and passionately opposed to the somewhat new philosophy of the university PR department making it dirricult for some journalistic souls to do their jobs.

But I'm old, nearly retired so what? Ergo, no problem.

[Phogge]

Hey Stupac, what is your deal with Outsider? You have a "problem?" Perhaps state your position/argumentative assumption but "problem?" I thought this wasn't supposed to be Thunderdome where we bite the heads off of trolls and rib each other like HS sophs.

For example, it is just my opinion but I think some folks here take themselves and their opinions a bit too seriously. Overall a lack of humor abounds. But I don't have a problem with it or I'd adios myself. I just laugh a little and get on with it.

Outsider seems like a good guy and one of the extremely small cadre of non-Stanford people around here. But he's passionate about Stanford football and as I sit in Section 235 game after game and notice a half full stadium you guys need all the passionate fans you can muster. And my thoughts go back as far as a kid at his first Big Game in 1953. Love Stanford football, kind of neutral about the school and passionately opposed to the somewhat new philosophy of the university PR department making it dirricult for some journalistic souls to do their jobs.

But I'm old, nearly retired so what? Ergo, no problem.

[ChicagoCard]

[ChicagoCard]

[OutsiderFan]

That's all fine and good.  But you are completely missing my greater point.

That point is people on this board are so freaking judgmental, and so holier than thou, and so self-righteous, that anyone who says something in a way that doesn't conform to some prim and proper notion of what acting like a Stanford person is, will be marginalized and attacked.  There is no room for respectful opinions if they in any way take away from or call into question anything Stanford does. 

Teejers is a perfect example.  His takes are never disrespectful to anyone, yet he's got a -58 "respect" score.  Who the hell are we to say whether we respect him or not?  Do you know him personally?  Does he kick dogs and murder kittens or something? He's got opinions just like the rest of the conformists around here, yet because he dares to criticize and/or say unpopular things, and colors outside the lines, he's treated as an outcast.  Why is this necessary?  Y'all already ran off JohnnyO, who was one of the most insightful and colorful characters this board has ever had.  I hope Teejers has the fortitude to stick around.

[OutsiderFan]

That's all fine and good.  But you are completely missing my greater point.

That point is people on this board are so freaking judgmental, and so holier than thou, and so self-righteous, that anyone who says something in a way that doesn't conform to some prim and proper notion of what acting like a Stanford person is, will be marginalized and attacked.  There is no room for respectful opinions if they in any way take away from or call into question anything Stanford does. 

Teejers is a perfect example.  His takes are never disrespectful to anyone, yet he's got a -58 "respect" score.  Who the hell are we to say whether we respect him or not?  Do you know him personally?  Does he kick dogs and murder kittens or something? He's got opinions just like the rest of the conformists around here, yet because he dares to criticize and/or say unpopular things, and colors outside the lines, he's treated as an outcast.  Why is this necessary?  Y'all already ran off JohnnyO, who was one of the most insightful and colorful characters this board has ever had.  I hope Teejers has the fortitude to stick around.