11-09-2021, 12:37 PM
I mean at this point, I'm just hoping no one gets injured.
2021 Stanford at Oregon State Predictions Thread
I hate it that my first-ever prediction is so negative. I expect Oregon State defense to be very motivated by their coach being fired. They will play better than they have been. The effect won't last long, but for one game it will.
McKee won't play. I fear West will. If the Oregon State defense is totally unable to apply any pressure, West might do OK. However, I don't expect that will be the case. One would hope our OL would be able to step up their game, but I frankly don't expect it. If we could run the ball we would have a chance even with a limited passing game. That is our best hope. However, by my prediction one can see I doubt that will happen.
I expect our defense will play better. The problem is that even when it plays at its best level, we are good for three or maybe four stops a game. Sometimes the other team stops itself a few times, but I doubt Oregon State will at home. If our offense is going three and out, three or four stops isn't going to be nearly enough.
McKee won't play. I fear West will. If the Oregon State defense is totally unable to apply any pressure, West might do OK. However, I don't expect that will be the case. One would hope our OL would be able to step up their game, but I frankly don't expect it. If we could run the ball we would have a chance even with a limited passing game. That is our best hope. However, by my prediction one can see I doubt that will happen.
I expect our defense will play better. The problem is that even when it plays at its best level, we are good for three or maybe four stops a game. Sometimes the other team stops itself a few times, but I doubt Oregon State will at home. If our offense is going three and out, three or four stops isn't going to be nearly enough.
I hate it that my first-ever prediction is so negative. I expect Oregon State defense to be very motivated by their coach being fired. They will play better than they have been. The effect won't last long, but for one game it will.
McKee won't play. I fear West will. If the Oregon State defense is totally unable to apply any pressure, West might do OK. However, I don't expect that will be the case. One would hope our OL would be able to step up their game, but I frankly don't expect it. If we could run the ball we would have a chance even with a limited passing game. That is our best hope. However, by my prediction one can see I doubt that will happen.
I expect our defense will play better. The problem is that even when it plays at its best level, we are good for three or maybe four stops a game. Sometimes the other team stops itself a few times, but I doubt Oregon State will at home. If our offense is going three and out, three or four stops isn't going to be nearly enough.
McKee won't play. I fear West will. If the Oregon State defense is totally unable to apply any pressure, West might do OK. However, I don't expect that will be the case. One would hope our OL would be able to step up their game, but I frankly don't expect it. If we could run the ball we would have a chance even with a limited passing game. That is our best hope. However, by my prediction one can see I doubt that will happen.
I expect our defense will play better. The problem is that even when it plays at its best level, we are good for three or maybe four stops a game. Sometimes the other team stops itself a few times, but I doubt Oregon State will at home. If our offense is going three and out, three or four stops isn't going to be nearly enough.
11-09-2021, 01:01 PM
(11-09-2021, 12:55 PM)Goose Wrote: I hate it that my first-ever prediction is so negative. I expect Oregon State defense to be very motivated by their coach being fired. They will play better than they have been. The effect won't last long, but for one game it will.
McKee won't play. I fear West will. If the Oregon State defense is totally unable to apply any pressure, West might do OK. However, I don't expect that will be the case. One would hope our OL would be able to step up their game, but I frankly don't expect it. If we could run the ball we would have a chance even with a limited passing game. That is our best hope. However, by my prediction one can see I doubt that will happen.
I expect our defense will play better. The problem is that even when it plays at its best level, we are good for three or maybe four stops a game. Sometimes the other team stops itself a few times, but I doubt Oregon State will at home. If our offense is going three and out, three or four stops isn't going to be nearly enough.
on the OSU defense
Quote:The Beavers are allowing 21.3 points per game and 5.14 yards per play at home. On the road, they’re yielding 32.8 points per game and 6.24 yards per play.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/11/07/p...-and-more/
on QB
[tweet]https://twitter.com/TroyClardy/status/1458155911109775361?fbclid=IwAR1k88uIZF0CAUg7iGSEwIvn-ECmI0CwZa9wbSx6ZXoFAVgr-h5F7JwtRPk[/tweet]
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
(11-09-2021, 12:55 PM)Goose Wrote: I hate it that my first-ever prediction is so negative. I expect Oregon State defense to be very motivated by their coach being fired. They will play better than they have been. The effect won't last long, but for one game it will.
McKee won't play. I fear West will. If the Oregon State defense is totally unable to apply any pressure, West might do OK. However, I don't expect that will be the case. One would hope our OL would be able to step up their game, but I frankly don't expect it. If we could run the ball we would have a chance even with a limited passing game. That is our best hope. However, by my prediction one can see I doubt that will happen.
I expect our defense will play better. The problem is that even when it plays at its best level, we are good for three or maybe four stops a game. Sometimes the other team stops itself a few times, but I doubt Oregon State will at home. If our offense is going three and out, three or four stops isn't going to be nearly enough.
on the OSU defense
Quote:The Beavers are allowing 21.3 points per game and 5.14 yards per play at home. On the road, they’re yielding 32.8 points per game and 6.24 yards per play.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/11/07/p...-and-more/
on QB
[tweet]https://twitter.com/TroyClardy/status/1458155911109775361?fbclid=IwAR1k88uIZF0CAUg7iGSEwIvn-ECmI0CwZa9wbSx6ZXoFAVgr-h5F7JwtRPk[/tweet]
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
11-09-2021, 02:41 PM
(11-09-2021, 01:01 PM)82lsju Wrote: on the OSU defense
Quote:The Beavers are allowing 21.3 points per game and 5.14 yards per play at home. On the road, they’re yielding 32.8 points per game and 6.24 yards per play.
on QB
[tweet]https://twitter.com/TroyClardy/status/1458155911109775361?fbclid=IwAR1k88uIZF0CAUg7iGSEwIvn-ECmI0CwZa9wbSx6ZXoFAVgr-h5F7JwtRPk[/tweet]
Patu starting could make a difference. The Beavers are at home, so against the teams they have played they have given up an average of 21 points per game. Given a first time starter for Stanford, I would be happy if we can be average. I will update my guess to reflect that condition.
(11-09-2021, 01:01 PM)82lsju Wrote: on the OSU defense
Quote:The Beavers are allowing 21.3 points per game and 5.14 yards per play at home. On the road, they’re yielding 32.8 points per game and 6.24 yards per play.
on QB
[tweet]https://twitter.com/TroyClardy/status/1458155911109775361?fbclid=IwAR1k88uIZF0CAUg7iGSEwIvn-ECmI0CwZa9wbSx6ZXoFAVgr-h5F7JwtRPk[/tweet]
Patu starting could make a difference. The Beavers are at home, so against the teams they have played they have given up an average of 21 points per game. Given a first time starter for Stanford, I would be happy if we can be average. I will update my guess to reflect that condition.
11-09-2021, 02:48 PM
(11-09-2021, 02:41 PM)Goose Wrote:Patu starting could make a difference. The Beavers are at home, so against the teams they have played they have given up an average of 21 points per game. Given a first time starter for Stanford, I would be happy if we can be average. I will update my guess to reflect that condition.
OSU has given up at least 24 points in every game this year except their home shutout of Idaho
their home games
W over Hawaii 45-27
W over Idaho 42-0
W over UW 27-24
W over Utah 42-34
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
(11-09-2021, 02:41 PM)Goose Wrote:Patu starting could make a difference. The Beavers are at home, so against the teams they have played they have given up an average of 21 points per game. Given a first time starter for Stanford, I would be happy if we can be average. I will update my guess to reflect that condition.
OSU has given up at least 24 points in every game this year except their home shutout of Idaho
their home games
W over Hawaii 45-27
W over Idaho 42-0
W over UW 27-24
W over Utah 42-34
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
11-09-2021, 03:18 PM
(11-09-2021, 02:48 PM)82lsju Wrote: OSU has given up at least 24 points in every game this year except their home shutout of IdahoGood to know, but I will stick with the average. If our offense with McKee couldn't beat UW I would imagine 21 with Patu is about right. I also consider it a bit of a sacrifice/tribute to the Woofing Gods and maybe we will score 42 instead. Unfortunately I hear that the Woofing Gods can detect inverse woofing.
their home games
W over Hawaii 45-27
W over Idaho 42-0
W over UW 27-24
W over Utah 42-34
(11-09-2021, 02:48 PM)82lsju Wrote: OSU has given up at least 24 points in every game this year except their home shutout of IdahoGood to know, but I will stick with the average. If our offense with McKee couldn't beat UW I would imagine 21 with Patu is about right. I also consider it a bit of a sacrifice/tribute to the Woofing Gods and maybe we will score 42 instead. Unfortunately I hear that the Woofing Gods can detect inverse woofing.
their home games
W over Hawaii 45-27
W over Idaho 42-0
W over UW 27-24
W over Utah 42-34
11-09-2021, 04:21 PM
Do I think we can score more than we did last game? Of course!
Do I think our defense will do any better against the very very good OSU running game? Absolutely not.
30-17 Beavs, lucky if we keep them under 300 yards rushing.
Do I think our defense will do any better against the very very good OSU running game? Absolutely not.
30-17 Beavs, lucky if we keep them under 300 yards rushing.
Do I think we can score more than we did last game? Of course!
Do I think our defense will do any better against the very very good OSU running game? Absolutely not.
30-17 Beavs, lucky if we keep them under 300 yards rushing.
Do I think our defense will do any better against the very very good OSU running game? Absolutely not.
30-17 Beavs, lucky if we keep them under 300 yards rushing.
11-09-2021, 04:30 PM
(11-09-2021, 03:18 PM)Goose Wrote:(11-09-2021, 02:48 PM)82lsju Wrote: OSU has given up at least 24 points in every game this year except their home shutout of IdahoGood to know, but I will stick with the average. If our offense with McKee couldn't beat UW I would imagine 21 with Patu is about right. I also consider it a bit of a sacrifice/tribute to the Woofing Gods and maybe we will score 42 instead. Unfortunately I hear that the Woofing Gods can detect inverse woofing.
their home games
W over Hawaii 45-27
W over Idaho 42-0
W over UW 27-24
W over Utah 42-34
OSU 38 Stanford 13.
(11-09-2021, 03:18 PM)Goose Wrote:(11-09-2021, 02:48 PM)82lsju Wrote: OSU has given up at least 24 points in every game this year except their home shutout of IdahoGood to know, but I will stick with the average. If our offense with McKee couldn't beat UW I would imagine 21 with Patu is about right. I also consider it a bit of a sacrifice/tribute to the Woofing Gods and maybe we will score 42 instead. Unfortunately I hear that the Woofing Gods can detect inverse woofing.
their home games
W over Hawaii 45-27
W over Idaho 42-0
W over UW 27-24
W over Utah 42-34
OSU 38 Stanford 13.
11-09-2021, 05:36 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-09-2021, 05:38 PM by Stanfordindians1again.)
McKee plays:
Trees 21
Beavs 34 with the run game
W/out McKee
Trees -6
Beavers- 38
Trees 21
Beavs 34 with the run game
W/out McKee
Trees -6
Beavers- 38
(This post was last modified: 11-09-2021, 05:38 PM by Stanfordindians1again.)
McKee plays:
Trees 21
Beavs 34 with the run game
W/out McKee
Trees -6
Beavers- 38
Trees 21
Beavs 34 with the run game
W/out McKee
Trees -6
Beavers- 38
11-09-2021, 06:46 PM
Starting Patu shakes it up. 'Bout time!
I think Patu is a cool customer, but who does he have to throw to?
At least he can get rid of the ball. West is a sack generating machine.
I give us a chance at home (despite the total ineptness vs UTAH), but up there...
STAN 17, ORST 31 -- if we get a touchdown on Defense.
At this point, play loose and take chances.
Sadly, the Beavs will grind it on the ground 2 to 1 or better, and make us stop them.
I think Patu is a cool customer, but who does he have to throw to?
At least he can get rid of the ball. West is a sack generating machine.
I give us a chance at home (despite the total ineptness vs UTAH), but up there...
STAN 17, ORST 31 -- if we get a touchdown on Defense.
At this point, play loose and take chances.
Sadly, the Beavs will grind it on the ground 2 to 1 or better, and make us stop them.
Starting Patu shakes it up. 'Bout time!
I think Patu is a cool customer, but who does he have to throw to?
At least he can get rid of the ball. West is a sack generating machine.
I give us a chance at home (despite the total ineptness vs UTAH), but up there...
STAN 17, ORST 31 -- if we get a touchdown on Defense.
At this point, play loose and take chances.
Sadly, the Beavs will grind it on the ground 2 to 1 or better, and make us stop them.
I think Patu is a cool customer, but who does he have to throw to?
At least he can get rid of the ball. West is a sack generating machine.
I give us a chance at home (despite the total ineptness vs UTAH), but up there...
STAN 17, ORST 31 -- if we get a touchdown on Defense.
At this point, play loose and take chances.
Sadly, the Beavs will grind it on the ground 2 to 1 or better, and make us stop them.
11-10-2021, 10:47 AM
You know we suck when the "Red Hot" has us winning 24-17.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
11-10-2021, 11:04 AM
I have Stanford winning on Saturday 15-14, because that was the score of the game in 2017 when Stanford was missing its best player--Bryce Love--and had no business winning over a pretty lousy OSU team. Yet we did.
This year, OSU is better than Stanford, but not by leaps and bounds if we have McKee. I have no idea what to expect from Patu, but results aside I am hoping to see at least some non-McKee positive signs from the QB position, since--the remaining three games this year aside--Patu will most likely be the starter in 2023, maybe 2022.
This year, OSU is better than Stanford, but not by leaps and bounds if we have McKee. I have no idea what to expect from Patu, but results aside I am hoping to see at least some non-McKee positive signs from the QB position, since--the remaining three games this year aside--Patu will most likely be the starter in 2023, maybe 2022.
If there's one thing people have learned in Berkeley, it's that you can't put "Cal football" and "Rose Bowl" in the same sentence. The words just don't fit. You'd be better off linking "covered wagons" with "Mars travel." (Bruce Jenkins, Cal '70, SF Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2017)
I have Stanford winning on Saturday 15-14, because that was the score of the game in 2017 when Stanford was missing its best player--Bryce Love--and had no business winning over a pretty lousy OSU team. Yet we did.
This year, OSU is better than Stanford, but not by leaps and bounds if we have McKee. I have no idea what to expect from Patu, but results aside I am hoping to see at least some non-McKee positive signs from the QB position, since--the remaining three games this year aside--Patu will most likely be the starter in 2023, maybe 2022.
This year, OSU is better than Stanford, but not by leaps and bounds if we have McKee. I have no idea what to expect from Patu, but results aside I am hoping to see at least some non-McKee positive signs from the QB position, since--the remaining three games this year aside--Patu will most likely be the starter in 2023, maybe 2022.
If there's one thing people have learned in Berkeley, it's that you can't put "Cal football" and "Rose Bowl" in the same sentence. The words just don't fit. You'd be better off linking "covered wagons" with "Mars travel." (Bruce Jenkins, Cal '70, SF Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2017)
11-10-2021, 11:24 AM
Do I really believe we are going to win this game? No. Do I want to believe we can win this game? Yes. I'm thinking Patu gets us a TD, the D gets us a TD, and we kick a bunch of field goals.
Stanford 26, Beavs 24.
Stanford 26, Beavs 24.
Pax et Bonum
Do I really believe we are going to win this game? No. Do I want to believe we can win this game? Yes. I'm thinking Patu gets us a TD, the D gets us a TD, and we kick a bunch of field goals.
Stanford 26, Beavs 24.
Stanford 26, Beavs 24.
Pax et Bonum
11-10-2021, 01:11 PM
With three games to go, I'm doing only slightly better than the Stanford football team. 4 Right, 5 Wrong. Still, I am 13th out of 30 or so CARDboard members who have played at least 9 times. Proof that this year is a mess. With McKee doubtful and our defense a sieve against the run, I predict 30-17 Beavers. Note that I think the Beavers have regressed since their stunning win over Utah. Getting punked by Colorado in OT is not a good sign for the team. The defensive coordinator got the scapegoat trophy for that contest and was fired. But even with a downward trending OSU team, I do no think we have a realistic shot to take them down in Corvallis.
vs. Kansas State -- Wrong
vs. USC -- Wrong
vs. Vanderbilt -- Right
vs. UCLA -- Right
vs. Oregon -- Wrong
vs. Arizona State -- Wrong
vs. Washington State -- Wrong
vs. Washington -- Right
vs. Utah -- Right
vs. Kansas State -- Wrong
vs. USC -- Wrong
vs. Vanderbilt -- Right
vs. UCLA -- Right
vs. Oregon -- Wrong
vs. Arizona State -- Wrong
vs. Washington State -- Wrong
vs. Washington -- Right
vs. Utah -- Right
With three games to go, I'm doing only slightly better than the Stanford football team. 4 Right, 5 Wrong. Still, I am 13th out of 30 or so CARDboard members who have played at least 9 times. Proof that this year is a mess. With McKee doubtful and our defense a sieve against the run, I predict 30-17 Beavers. Note that I think the Beavers have regressed since their stunning win over Utah. Getting punked by Colorado in OT is not a good sign for the team. The defensive coordinator got the scapegoat trophy for that contest and was fired. But even with a downward trending OSU team, I do no think we have a realistic shot to take them down in Corvallis.
vs. Kansas State -- Wrong
vs. USC -- Wrong
vs. Vanderbilt -- Right
vs. UCLA -- Right
vs. Oregon -- Wrong
vs. Arizona State -- Wrong
vs. Washington State -- Wrong
vs. Washington -- Right
vs. Utah -- Right
vs. Kansas State -- Wrong
vs. USC -- Wrong
vs. Vanderbilt -- Right
vs. UCLA -- Right
vs. Oregon -- Wrong
vs. Arizona State -- Wrong
vs. Washington State -- Wrong
vs. Washington -- Right
vs. Utah -- Right
11-10-2021, 01:33 PM
Stanford has a well below average OL, few health WRs, and RBs that seem incapable of yards after contact.
Stanford has D is close to average against passing teams, but struggles against teams that want to run.
OSU is not a good match-up and needs a good win to get back in line for better bowls.
Oregon State: 41
Stanford: 17
I am assuming West does not play. If West is the QB then I would drop Stanford down to 6 points.
That may seem negative, but my real hope is for Stanford to get out of this game with few injuries and no targeting related suspensions that would carry over to the 1st half of Big Game.
Stanford has D is close to average against passing teams, but struggles against teams that want to run.
OSU is not a good match-up and needs a good win to get back in line for better bowls.
Oregon State: 41
Stanford: 17
I am assuming West does not play. If West is the QB then I would drop Stanford down to 6 points.
That may seem negative, but my real hope is for Stanford to get out of this game with few injuries and no targeting related suspensions that would carry over to the 1st half of Big Game.
Stanford has a well below average OL, few health WRs, and RBs that seem incapable of yards after contact.
Stanford has D is close to average against passing teams, but struggles against teams that want to run.
OSU is not a good match-up and needs a good win to get back in line for better bowls.
Oregon State: 41
Stanford: 17
I am assuming West does not play. If West is the QB then I would drop Stanford down to 6 points.
That may seem negative, but my real hope is for Stanford to get out of this game with few injuries and no targeting related suspensions that would carry over to the 1st half of Big Game.
Stanford has D is close to average against passing teams, but struggles against teams that want to run.
OSU is not a good match-up and needs a good win to get back in line for better bowls.
Oregon State: 41
Stanford: 17
I am assuming West does not play. If West is the QB then I would drop Stanford down to 6 points.
That may seem negative, but my real hope is for Stanford to get out of this game with few injuries and no targeting related suspensions that would carry over to the 1st half of Big Game.
McKee sits this weekend and I hope to hell Patu doesn't go down. Needless to say, I put this one in the L column no matter who's under center. Program is a shadow of its former self. Coach has no answers other than the usual-suspect platitudes. Season's another bust -- worse than even I had imagined last summer. Insofar as the BG is concerned, I really don't care anymore at this point. Maybe, just maybe, 3-9 might get some attention among influentials. Such as they are at Stanford. What happened from 2009 to 2015/17 is a misty memory. But I'm thankful to have been there. I just can't help feeling like it didn't have to be this way. But it is. And that's that. On to WBB and MBB.
Oh, rodents gnaw on scrawny trees, 37-10.
Oh, rodents gnaw on scrawny trees, 37-10.
Life is too short to waste on crap football.
McKee sits this weekend and I hope to hell Patu doesn't go down. Needless to say, I put this one in the L column no matter who's under center. Program is a shadow of its former self. Coach has no answers other than the usual-suspect platitudes. Season's another bust -- worse than even I had imagined last summer. Insofar as the BG is concerned, I really don't care anymore at this point. Maybe, just maybe, 3-9 might get some attention among influentials. Such as they are at Stanford. What happened from 2009 to 2015/17 is a misty memory. But I'm thankful to have been there. I just can't help feeling like it didn't have to be this way. But it is. And that's that. On to WBB and MBB.
Oh, rodents gnaw on scrawny trees, 37-10.
Oh, rodents gnaw on scrawny trees, 37-10.
Life is too short to waste on crap football.
11-10-2021, 05:19 PM
(11-10-2021, 04:49 PM)gailtate Wrote: McKee sits this weekend and I hope to hell Patu doesn't go down. Needless to say, I put this one in the L column no matter who's under center. Program is a shadow of its former self. Coach has no answers other than the usual-suspect platitudes. Season's another bust -- worse than even I had imagined last summer. Insofar as the BG is concerned, I really don't care anymore at this point. Maybe, just maybe, 3-9 might get some attention among influentials. Such as they are at Stanford. What happened from 2009 to 2015/17 is a misty memory. But I'm thankful to have been there. I just can't help feeling like it didn't have to be this way. But it is. And that's that. On to WBB and MBB.
Oh, rodents gnaw on scrawny trees, 37-10.
Frankly, the program would probably benefit long-term if Stanford goes winless the rest of the way. Which it is almost certainly bound to do. Shaw will probably survive the off-season, but he can't forever.
(11-10-2021, 04:49 PM)gailtate Wrote: McKee sits this weekend and I hope to hell Patu doesn't go down. Needless to say, I put this one in the L column no matter who's under center. Program is a shadow of its former self. Coach has no answers other than the usual-suspect platitudes. Season's another bust -- worse than even I had imagined last summer. Insofar as the BG is concerned, I really don't care anymore at this point. Maybe, just maybe, 3-9 might get some attention among influentials. Such as they are at Stanford. What happened from 2009 to 2015/17 is a misty memory. But I'm thankful to have been there. I just can't help feeling like it didn't have to be this way. But it is. And that's that. On to WBB and MBB.
Oh, rodents gnaw on scrawny trees, 37-10.
Frankly, the program would probably benefit long-term if Stanford goes winless the rest of the way. Which it is almost certainly bound to do. Shaw will probably survive the off-season, but he can't forever.
11-13-2021, 06:15 AM
(11-10-2021, 05:19 PM)Brickcity Wrote:(11-10-2021, 04:49 PM)gailtate Wrote: McKee sits this weekend and I hope to hell Patu doesn't go down. Needless to say, I put this one in the L column no matter who's under center. Program is a shadow of its former self. Coach has no answers other than the usual-suspect platitudes. Season's another bust -- worse than even I had imagined last summer. Insofar as the BG is concerned, I really don't care anymore at this point. Maybe, just maybe, 3-9 might get some attention among influentials. Such as they are at Stanford. What happened from 2009 to 2015/17 is a misty memory. But I'm thankful to have been there. I just can't help feeling like it didn't have to be this way. But it is. And that's that. On to WBB and MBB.
Oh, rodents gnaw on scrawny trees, 37-10.
Frankly, the program would probably benefit long-term if Stanford goes winless the rest of the way. Which it is almost certainly bound to do. Shaw will probably survive the off-season, but he can't forever.
I think we have a reasonable shot against Kal if McKee can make it back. If he can't you are probably right.
Anyway it will be fun seeing what Patu can accomplish, as long as people aren't expecting too much.
(11-10-2021, 05:19 PM)Brickcity Wrote:(11-10-2021, 04:49 PM)gailtate Wrote: McKee sits this weekend and I hope to hell Patu doesn't go down. Needless to say, I put this one in the L column no matter who's under center. Program is a shadow of its former self. Coach has no answers other than the usual-suspect platitudes. Season's another bust -- worse than even I had imagined last summer. Insofar as the BG is concerned, I really don't care anymore at this point. Maybe, just maybe, 3-9 might get some attention among influentials. Such as they are at Stanford. What happened from 2009 to 2015/17 is a misty memory. But I'm thankful to have been there. I just can't help feeling like it didn't have to be this way. But it is. And that's that. On to WBB and MBB.
Oh, rodents gnaw on scrawny trees, 37-10.
Frankly, the program would probably benefit long-term if Stanford goes winless the rest of the way. Which it is almost certainly bound to do. Shaw will probably survive the off-season, but he can't forever.
I think we have a reasonable shot against Kal if McKee can make it back. If he can't you are probably right.
Anyway it will be fun seeing what Patu can accomplish, as long as people aren't expecting too much.
11-13-2021, 07:04 AM
(11-10-2021, 04:49 PM)gailtate Wrote: McKee sits this weekend and I hope to hell Patu doesn't go down. Needless to say, I put this one in the L column no matter who's under center. Program is a shadow of its former self. Coach has no answers other than the usual-suspect platitudes. Season's another bust -- worse than even I had imagined last summer. Insofar as the BG is concerned, I really don't care anymore at this point. Maybe, just maybe, 3-9 might get some attention among influentials. Such as they are at Stanford. What happened from 2009 to 2015/17 is a misty memory. But I'm thankful to have been there. I just can't help feeling like it didn't have to be this way. But it is. And that's that. On to WBB and MBB.
Oh, rodents gnaw on scrawny trees, 37-10.
Here's the bit that irks me: Stanford has consistently outrecruited Oregon State in the last decade or so. We should have the talent to beat them soundly, as we have for most of the last eleven years. In fact, our current win streak dates to 2010. And yet, we are 12+ point underdogs. What is the difference? Frankly, it can only be attributable to coaching. Or maybe our recruits were overrated, or the wrong set of recruits for the program. But that also is attributable to coaching. Ultimately, that's what it boils down to.
(11-10-2021, 04:49 PM)gailtate Wrote: McKee sits this weekend and I hope to hell Patu doesn't go down. Needless to say, I put this one in the L column no matter who's under center. Program is a shadow of its former self. Coach has no answers other than the usual-suspect platitudes. Season's another bust -- worse than even I had imagined last summer. Insofar as the BG is concerned, I really don't care anymore at this point. Maybe, just maybe, 3-9 might get some attention among influentials. Such as they are at Stanford. What happened from 2009 to 2015/17 is a misty memory. But I'm thankful to have been there. I just can't help feeling like it didn't have to be this way. But it is. And that's that. On to WBB and MBB.
Oh, rodents gnaw on scrawny trees, 37-10.
Here's the bit that irks me: Stanford has consistently outrecruited Oregon State in the last decade or so. We should have the talent to beat them soundly, as we have for most of the last eleven years. In fact, our current win streak dates to 2010. And yet, we are 12+ point underdogs. What is the difference? Frankly, it can only be attributable to coaching. Or maybe our recruits were overrated, or the wrong set of recruits for the program. But that also is attributable to coaching. Ultimately, that's what it boils down to.
11-13-2021, 07:56 AM
(11-13-2021, 07:04 AM)Austroturf Wrote: Here's the bit that irks me: Stanford has consistently outrecruited Oregon State in the last decade or so. We should have the talent to beat them soundly, as we have for most of the last eleven years. In fact, our current win streak dates to 2010. And yet, we are 12+ point underdogs. What is the difference? Frankly, it can only be attributable to coaching. Or maybe our recruits were overrated, or the wrong set of recruits for the program. But that also is attributable to coaching. Ultimately, that's what it boils down to.That logic only gets you so far. Notre Dame, USC and Oregon have all consistently recruited MUCH better than Stanford can ever hope to recruit based on the 2 AP requirement. And yet, in the last decade Coach Shaw's record against those programs is pretty solid. So that ability for Stanford to secure wins against superior talent boils down to....coaching. At least that was the perspective of USC and Oregon types.
Ultimately 3-6 comes down to coaching and a 3-9 or 4-8 season would be an undesirable result. 4-2 in the 2020 season with only one home game and no home practice venue came down to coaching too. Though, I suspect that season is discounted by most fans because we didn't get to see it in person.
FWIW - The relatively poor performance by most of the fall 2021 Stanford sports teams suggest to me that the COVID-19 pandemic campus experience for student-athletes, and probably all students, should not be discounted. I applaud the AD for not trying to use COVID protocols or the challenging campus environment as excuses while the pandemic kills thousands of people each week, but with the possible exception of men's cross country, the teams are having a really tough time. 7 teams (WXC, WFH, WVB, MWP, WSOC, MSOC and Football) are having seasons well below their norms. I am not in DAPER day to day but maybe it is not just coaching this season at Stanford.
That noted, I would hope Shaw could find a way to implement a more creative offense and a new strength and conditioning program ASAP.
(11-13-2021, 07:04 AM)Austroturf Wrote: Here's the bit that irks me: Stanford has consistently outrecruited Oregon State in the last decade or so. We should have the talent to beat them soundly, as we have for most of the last eleven years. In fact, our current win streak dates to 2010. And yet, we are 12+ point underdogs. What is the difference? Frankly, it can only be attributable to coaching. Or maybe our recruits were overrated, or the wrong set of recruits for the program. But that also is attributable to coaching. Ultimately, that's what it boils down to.That logic only gets you so far. Notre Dame, USC and Oregon have all consistently recruited MUCH better than Stanford can ever hope to recruit based on the 2 AP requirement. And yet, in the last decade Coach Shaw's record against those programs is pretty solid. So that ability for Stanford to secure wins against superior talent boils down to....coaching. At least that was the perspective of USC and Oregon types.
Ultimately 3-6 comes down to coaching and a 3-9 or 4-8 season would be an undesirable result. 4-2 in the 2020 season with only one home game and no home practice venue came down to coaching too. Though, I suspect that season is discounted by most fans because we didn't get to see it in person.
FWIW - The relatively poor performance by most of the fall 2021 Stanford sports teams suggest to me that the COVID-19 pandemic campus experience for student-athletes, and probably all students, should not be discounted. I applaud the AD for not trying to use COVID protocols or the challenging campus environment as excuses while the pandemic kills thousands of people each week, but with the possible exception of men's cross country, the teams are having a really tough time. 7 teams (WXC, WFH, WVB, MWP, WSOC, MSOC and Football) are having seasons well below their norms. I am not in DAPER day to day but maybe it is not just coaching this season at Stanford.
That noted, I would hope Shaw could find a way to implement a more creative offense and a new strength and conditioning program ASAP.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »