[BostonCard]

Athlon releases them, with Stanford picked to go between 8-4 and 10-2:

Consensus wins against SDSU, USC, Davis, ASU, WSU, OSU, Cal (surprised everyone picked us to beat SC).
3 votes to 1 against Oregon and Utah
Split against UCLA
Consensus losses against UW and Notre Dame

[tweet]https://twitter.com/AthlonSports/status/1024843477425827840[/tweet]

BC

[BostonCard]

Athlon releases them, with Stanford picked to go between 8-4 and 10-2:

Consensus wins against SDSU, USC, Davis, ASU, WSU, OSU, Cal (surprised everyone picked us to beat SC).
3 votes to 1 against Oregon and Utah
Split against UCLA
Consensus losses against UW and Notre Dame

[tweet]https://twitter.com/AthlonSports/status/1024843477425827840[/tweet]

BC

[CTcard]

Athlon releases them, with Stanford picked to go between 8-4 and 10-2:

Consensus wins against SDSU, USC, Davis, ASU, WSU, OSU, Cal (surprised everyone picked us to beat SC).
3 votes to 1 against Oregon and Utah
Split against UCLA
Consensus losses against UW and Notre Dame

Outside of the $C game (which you mention), the only prediction that really catches my eye is half the guys picking UCLA in our final regular season game. By the way, neither of those two guys predict that UCLA will be particularly good this year, on their UCLA picks they have them going 6-6. (The other two guys predict UCLA to go 5-7 and 4-8.)

Kelly at UCLA is an interesting case to watch. UCLA was pretty much a mess last year, mostly on defense but also on offense when Rosen wasn't playing. They also lose a lot from that team. I saw a comment they have just 10 starters back, and I don't know if that includes kickers. 

On the other hand, UCLA recruiting classes have been ranked rather highly over recent years. Going back from the most recent class we have 2018=#19, 2017=#20, 2016=#13, 2015=#12, 2014=#18 (all 247 Composite rankings). 
So, it is at least possible that there is some inherent talent for Kelly to work with. 

Also of interest in the southland, is that so far the Chipster's first recruiting class does not seem to be going well and there is some grumbling among the faithful. At the moment they have 7 commits, all three stars. 

Of course along with the grumbling on the Bruin message boards, there is also the theme that this is all going to Kelly's clever plan. Apparently he wants to avoid higher rated athletes because the guys nobody wants have better attitudes and are willing to work harder. To me the strangest part of this theory is that he is apparently copying Stanford's road map to success, with the difference that Kelly's in-game brilliance compared to Shaw's ineptitude means that the same approach will lead to national championships is Westwood that Stanford could never achieve.

[CTcard]

Athlon releases them, with Stanford picked to go between 8-4 and 10-2:

Consensus wins against SDSU, USC, Davis, ASU, WSU, OSU, Cal (surprised everyone picked us to beat SC).
3 votes to 1 against Oregon and Utah
Split against UCLA
Consensus losses against UW and Notre Dame

Outside of the $C game (which you mention), the only prediction that really catches my eye is half the guys picking UCLA in our final regular season game. By the way, neither of those two guys predict that UCLA will be particularly good this year, on their UCLA picks they have them going 6-6. (The other two guys predict UCLA to go 5-7 and 4-8.)

Kelly at UCLA is an interesting case to watch. UCLA was pretty much a mess last year, mostly on defense but also on offense when Rosen wasn't playing. They also lose a lot from that team. I saw a comment they have just 10 starters back, and I don't know if that includes kickers. 

On the other hand, UCLA recruiting classes have been ranked rather highly over recent years. Going back from the most recent class we have 2018=#19, 2017=#20, 2016=#13, 2015=#12, 2014=#18 (all 247 Composite rankings). 
So, it is at least possible that there is some inherent talent for Kelly to work with. 

Also of interest in the southland, is that so far the Chipster's first recruiting class does not seem to be going well and there is some grumbling among the faithful. At the moment they have 7 commits, all three stars. 

Of course along with the grumbling on the Bruin message boards, there is also the theme that this is all going to Kelly's clever plan. Apparently he wants to avoid higher rated athletes because the guys nobody wants have better attitudes and are willing to work harder. To me the strangest part of this theory is that he is apparently copying Stanford's road map to success, with the difference that Kelly's in-game brilliance compared to Shaw's ineptitude means that the same approach will lead to national championships is Westwood that Stanford could never achieve.

[SamuelMcF]

Athlon releases them, with Stanford picked to go between 8-4 and 10-2:

Consensus wins against SDSU, USC, Davis, ASU, WSU, OSU, Cal (surprised everyone picked us to beat SC).
3 votes to 1 against Oregon and Utah
Split against UCLA
Consensus losses against UW and Notre Dame

BC

Besides the UCLA game (agree that this is surprising), I am floored that EVERYONE picked the Domers. Yes, it's in their house. But they lose so much on offense: 2 All-American linemen, starting RB Adams, stud WR Equanimeous St. Brown, and don't forget that Wimbush is still the starting QB...

[SamuelMcF]

Athlon releases them, with Stanford picked to go between 8-4 and 10-2:

Consensus wins against SDSU, USC, Davis, ASU, WSU, OSU, Cal (surprised everyone picked us to beat SC).
3 votes to 1 against Oregon and Utah
Split against UCLA
Consensus losses against UW and Notre Dame

BC

Besides the UCLA game (agree that this is surprising), I am floored that EVERYONE picked the Domers. Yes, it's in their house. But they lose so much on offense: 2 All-American linemen, starting RB Adams, stud WR Equanimeous St. Brown, and don't forget that Wimbush is still the starting QB...

[Goose]

Outside of the $C game (which you mention), the only prediction that really catches my eye is half the guys picking UCLA in our final regular season game. By the way, neither of those two guys predict that UCLA will be particularly good this year, on their UCLA picks they have them going 6-6. (The other two guys predict UCLA to go 5-7 and 4-8.)

I really don't understand this prediction at all. Not that I think it is impossible that UCLA will be much better this year than last. It is very improbable however. In truth, nobody can have any idea that UCLA is going to be greatly improved at this point, because there is NO data to support that. It is a few of the same people who weren't good last year plus a bunch of people we know next to nothing about. Six games into the season, maybe one could say these guys are pretty good. But no way is it sane to say so now.

[Goose]

Outside of the $C game (which you mention), the only prediction that really catches my eye is half the guys picking UCLA in our final regular season game. By the way, neither of those two guys predict that UCLA will be particularly good this year, on their UCLA picks they have them going 6-6. (The other two guys predict UCLA to go 5-7 and 4-8.)

I really don't understand this prediction at all. Not that I think it is impossible that UCLA will be much better this year than last. It is very improbable however. In truth, nobody can have any idea that UCLA is going to be greatly improved at this point, because there is NO data to support that. It is a few of the same people who weren't good last year plus a bunch of people we know next to nothing about. Six games into the season, maybe one could say these guys are pretty good. But no way is it sane to say so now.

[BobK]

The coaches poll

https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/football/f...aches-poll

Stanford 13.

[BobK]

The coaches poll

https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/football/f...aches-poll

Stanford 13.

[stupac2]

Keep in mind that in addition to the standard home/road split (which is larger than most people give it credit for, with Vegas typically giving a 3-point step from each jump in the home->neutral->road progression) last year Stanford was dreadful on the road. Look no further than the true debacles last year (ORST and SDSU), which were both road games. My recollection is that there was much more to it than that, but don't have the time to look now.

To anyone familiar with that looking at @ND and @UW and seeing near-certain losses, and @UCLA with Chip Kelly Magic™ and seeing something dicey, well I can't blame them. After all, every team has questions (our defense could be really quite bad, especially against Kelly's scheme), so at some point you have to just guess.

[stupac2]

Keep in mind that in addition to the standard home/road split (which is larger than most people give it credit for, with Vegas typically giving a 3-point step from each jump in the home->neutral->road progression) last year Stanford was dreadful on the road. Look no further than the true debacles last year (ORST and SDSU), which were both road games. My recollection is that there was much more to it than that, but don't have the time to look now.

To anyone familiar with that looking at @ND and @UW and seeing near-certain losses, and @UCLA with Chip Kelly Magic™ and seeing something dicey, well I can't blame them. After all, every team has questions (our defense could be really quite bad, especially against Kelly's scheme), so at some point you have to just guess.

[d4cohn]

To me, the Oregon and Arizona State road games are scarier than indicated in these predictions (and more than UCLA). I know regarding all of the talk about Herm at ASU, but I was in Tempe the last time we played them on the road (during the forgettable 2014 season), and we got smoked from the jump. And lest we underestimate Herm, we lost on the road to Ed O and needed a 3 OT thriller to survive on the road against Kiffin. 

Also, I cannot see us losing to Utah at home. I think we have a very good chance to go 5-1, if not undefeated at home, for the second consecutive year.

[d4cohn]

To me, the Oregon and Arizona State road games are scarier than indicated in these predictions (and more than UCLA). I know regarding all of the talk about Herm at ASU, but I was in Tempe the last time we played them on the road (during the forgettable 2014 season), and we got smoked from the jump. And lest we underestimate Herm, we lost on the road to Ed O and needed a 3 OT thriller to survive on the road against Kiffin. 

Also, I cannot see us losing to Utah at home. I think we have a very good chance to go 5-1, if not undefeated at home, for the second consecutive year.

[BobK]

I was also at the ASU game, very sad.  However always enjoy Mill Ave and the great beer and hmm other attractions.

[BobK]

I was also at the ASU game, very sad.  However always enjoy Mill Ave and the great beer and hmm other attractions.

[qwerty49]

I was also at the ASU game, very sad.  However always enjoy Mill Ave and the great beer and hmm other attractions.

The first time I visited Tempe, way back in the day, I was greatly impressed by the other attractions.  I thought there was some kind of selective genetic experiment going on at that school.

[qwerty49]

I was also at the ASU game, very sad.  However always enjoy Mill Ave and the great beer and hmm other attractions.

The first time I visited Tempe, way back in the day, I was greatly impressed by the other attractions.  I thought there was some kind of selective genetic experiment going on at that school.

[Snorlax94]

Here’s a sobering way to look at our schedule with the coaches’ poll:

We play 3 of the top 25 teams, which includes playing 2 of the top 11 away at their homes.
We play 4 teams also receiving votes.
Which means it’s easier to list the 5 unranked teams than the 7 vote-receiving ones.
And the teams not receiving votes include playing at UCLA against a Chip Kelly-coached team, & playing at ASU.

I think the danger of Utah is that they always play tough, and we play them at the end of the most brutal mini-series of the schedule (at Oregon, at South Bend, then at home vs Utah). The Notre Dame game is particularly brutal — you fly back from OREgon late Saturday night, then have a shortened week before a long flight to the dome. After that you fly all saturday night to get ready for the always physical Utah.

Despite all this, if the players can improve enough, and the injuries are limited, I am still hoping for the cfp and with this schedule, I ansolutely think we should deserve it with 11-1. With this schedule and enough chaos, I think we would deserve it even at 11-2.

[Snorlax94]

Here’s a sobering way to look at our schedule with the coaches’ poll:

We play 3 of the top 25 teams, which includes playing 2 of the top 11 away at their homes.
We play 4 teams also receiving votes.
Which means it’s easier to list the 5 unranked teams than the 7 vote-receiving ones.
And the teams not receiving votes include playing at UCLA against a Chip Kelly-coached team, & playing at ASU.

I think the danger of Utah is that they always play tough, and we play them at the end of the most brutal mini-series of the schedule (at Oregon, at South Bend, then at home vs Utah). The Notre Dame game is particularly brutal — you fly back from OREgon late Saturday night, then have a shortened week before a long flight to the dome. After that you fly all saturday night to get ready for the always physical Utah.

Despite all this, if the players can improve enough, and the injuries are limited, I am still hoping for the cfp and with this schedule, I ansolutely think we should deserve it with 11-1. With this schedule and enough chaos, I think we would deserve it even at 11-2.

[Redrum]

For those of us who are retired and still don't have enough time or motivation to pay attention,  who are these dudes who are voting/picking?  Any reason they are worth more (or less) consideration than any one in the myriad of opiners who come out of the woodwork this time of year?  Do they all cover the P12 full time?  Are any known honks or homers for particular teams?

[Redrum]

For those of us who are retired and still don't have enough time or motivation to pay attention,  who are these dudes who are voting/picking?  Any reason they are worth more (or less) consideration than any one in the myriad of opiners who come out of the woodwork this time of year?  Do they all cover the P12 full time?  Are any known honks or homers for particular teams?

[JJJ]

For what little it's worth, SI has us at #12.
The write-up, however, leaves a lot to be desired. Not what I would've expected from them.
(Had he had enough attempts, Costello's "just 8.6" ypa would have ranked him at #13, right behind Sam Darnold's 8.63.)

ypa rankings: https://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/...vidual/908

---

12. Stanford Cardinal
Last year: 9–5 (7–2 Pac-12); Lost to TCU in Alamo Bowl
SI Top 100 players: Two: RB Bryce Love (No. 2), OL Nate Herbig (No. 88)
X-Factor: You need more than Love, it turns out. Stanford’s star running back rewrote the school record book in 2017, rushing for 2,118 yards, but the Cardinal offense still sputtered behind quarterback K.J. Costello, who averaged just 8.6 yards per attempt. The junior showed potential in what was his first season as a starter, leading the team to an upset win over Washington and a victory over Notre Dame, but he completed barely 50% of his passes in losses to USC and TCU. With the team’s top four receivers and four All–Pac-12 linemen returning this season, Costello should improve his efficiency to keep opponents guessing—and get the most of Love’s labors. — Ross Dellenger

---

https://www.si.com/college-football/2018...on-alabama

[JJJ]

For what little it's worth, SI has us at #12.
The write-up, however, leaves a lot to be desired. Not what I would've expected from them.
(Had he had enough attempts, Costello's "just 8.6" ypa would have ranked him at #13, right behind Sam Darnold's 8.63.)

ypa rankings: https://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/...vidual/908

---

12. Stanford Cardinal
Last year: 9–5 (7–2 Pac-12); Lost to TCU in Alamo Bowl
SI Top 100 players: Two: RB Bryce Love (No. 2), OL Nate Herbig (No. 88)
X-Factor: You need more than Love, it turns out. Stanford’s star running back rewrote the school record book in 2017, rushing for 2,118 yards, but the Cardinal offense still sputtered behind quarterback K.J. Costello, who averaged just 8.6 yards per attempt. The junior showed potential in what was his first season as a starter, leading the team to an upset win over Washington and a victory over Notre Dame, but he completed barely 50% of his passes in losses to USC and TCU. With the team’s top four receivers and four All–Pac-12 linemen returning this season, Costello should improve his efficiency to keep opponents guessing—and get the most of Love’s labors. — Ross Dellenger

---

https://www.si.com/college-football/2018...on-alabama

[CTcard]

The write-up, however, leaves a lot to be desired. Not what I would've expected from them.
(Had he had enough attempts, Costello's "just 8.6" ypa would have ranked him at #13, right behind Sam Darnold's 8.63.)

ypa rankings: https://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/...vidual/908

---

12. Stanford Cardinal

X-Factor: ... but the Cardinal offense still sputtered behind quarterback K.J. Costello, who averaged just 8.6 yards per attempt. The junior showed potential in what was his first season as a starter, leading the team to an upset win over Washington and a victory over Notre Dame, but he completed barely 50% of his passes in losses to USC and TCU. ...

There does seem to be a theme out there in various previews that Stanford really struggled on offense in 2017. That seems to be because the writers are taking a quick glance at yds/game stats and don't realize that Stanford operates at a far slower pace than most college teams … or they simply don't know how to divide. 

And while I agree the comment about Costello's ypa is inane, it looks to me as if he actually averaged about 7.45 ypa, which is more on the order of okay than great (and would be about #51 on the list you gave). Costello does need to improve his completion percentage. 


There are other previews out there. The one from College Football News caught my eye. They are generally kind of complimentary towards Stanford if not particularly well informed [in fact there are a few double-take inducing statements in there, along with an impressive number of simple errors]. They pick Stanford for what has become the standard #2 in the North slot. 
https://collegefootballnews.com/2018/06/...eview-2018

On page 2, we learn that Love was even better than we had thought, though the ability of this writer to put together a sentence wasn't as strong:

The Cardinal led the Pac-12 in the fewest sacks allowed, and was great for the ground game that averaged over 200 yards per carry – someone had to pave the way for Love.

[CTcard]

The write-up, however, leaves a lot to be desired. Not what I would've expected from them.
(Had he had enough attempts, Costello's "just 8.6" ypa would have ranked him at #13, right behind Sam Darnold's 8.63.)

ypa rankings: https://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/...vidual/908

---

12. Stanford Cardinal

X-Factor: ... but the Cardinal offense still sputtered behind quarterback K.J. Costello, who averaged just 8.6 yards per attempt. The junior showed potential in what was his first season as a starter, leading the team to an upset win over Washington and a victory over Notre Dame, but he completed barely 50% of his passes in losses to USC and TCU. ...

There does seem to be a theme out there in various previews that Stanford really struggled on offense in 2017. That seems to be because the writers are taking a quick glance at yds/game stats and don't realize that Stanford operates at a far slower pace than most college teams … or they simply don't know how to divide. 

And while I agree the comment about Costello's ypa is inane, it looks to me as if he actually averaged about 7.45 ypa, which is more on the order of okay than great (and would be about #51 on the list you gave). Costello does need to improve his completion percentage. 


There are other previews out there. The one from College Football News caught my eye. They are generally kind of complimentary towards Stanford if not particularly well informed [in fact there are a few double-take inducing statements in there, along with an impressive number of simple errors]. They pick Stanford for what has become the standard #2 in the North slot. 
https://collegefootballnews.com/2018/06/...eview-2018

On page 2, we learn that Love was even better than we had thought, though the ability of this writer to put together a sentence wasn't as strong:

The Cardinal led the Pac-12 in the fewest sacks allowed, and was great for the ground game that averaged over 200 yards per carry – someone had to pave the way for Love.

[JJJ]

Thanks, CTcard, for the correction. I didn't think to fact check the author, which, come to think of it, should've been obvious! :)

[JJJ]

Thanks, CTcard, for the correction. I didn't think to fact check the author, which, come to think of it, should've been obvious! :)