06-08-2013, 11:40 AM
Trolling Phil Steele is Trolling
06-08-2013, 03:17 PM
(06-08-2013, 03:02 PM)oman link Wrote:I may have to pull back on my "nuke it from orbit" if Texas makes it to #4.
You know it's a crazy ranking when putting SC at #6 is maybe the third-craziest ranking on the list.
(06-08-2013, 03:02 PM)oman link Wrote:I may have to pull back on my "nuke it from orbit" if Texas makes it to #4.
You know it's a crazy ranking when putting SC at #6 is maybe the third-craziest ranking on the list.
06-09-2013, 10:31 AM
Especially considering all the players $¢ is losing, when they have no margin for such attrition, whether by injury or academic ineligibility. They just lost one of their highly recruited wideouts, meaning they're down to, what, 4, 5 guys in the entire WR unit? If their troubles ended at depth, it'd be one thing, but they don't -- and I look forward to watching their ship continue to sink this season, including in person on November 16!
(06-08-2013, 11:40 AM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:http://www.insidesocal.com/Under Stanford Control/2013/06/07/phil-steele-ranks-Under Stanford Control-no-6-in-nation/
Especially considering all the players $¢ is losing, when they have no margin for such attrition, whether by injury or academic ineligibility. They just lost one of their highly recruited wideouts, meaning they're down to, what, 4, 5 guys in the entire WR unit? If their troubles ended at depth, it'd be one thing, but they don't -- and I look forward to watching their ship continue to sink this season, including in person on November 16!
(06-08-2013, 11:40 AM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:http://www.insidesocal.com/Under Stanford Control/2013/06/07/phil-steele-ranks-Under Stanford Control-no-6-in-nation/
06-09-2013, 11:24 AM
I think the lack of tested QB experience is going to be a big factor for $C. Not sure how the OL is going to look either. And weren't they recently relying on a Penn St. RB transfer? Silas Redd is no world-beater. But you never know when a team is going to catch fire despite their coach.
I think the lack of tested QB experience is going to be a big factor for $C. Not sure how the OL is going to look either. And weren't they recently relying on a Penn St. RB transfer? Silas Redd is no world-beater. But you never know when a team is going to catch fire despite their coach.
06-11-2013, 08:28 AM
(06-09-2013, 11:24 AM)fullmetal link Wrote:I think the lack of tested QB experience is going to be a big factor for $C. Not sure how the OL is going to look either. And weren't they recently relying on a Penn St. RB transfer? Silas Redd is no world-beater. But you never know when a team is going to catch fire despite their coach.
Exactly. Breaking in a new QB is a big one and it's one of several big reasons one might expect $¢ to take a step back. But I laugh at how so many pundits are still spellbound by the program's tradition. I've seen them ranked top 10 in several preseason polls (Phil Steele's being one of them). Even Vegas sees Stanford as an underdog in the Coliseum on Nov. 16.
(06-09-2013, 11:24 AM)fullmetal link Wrote:I think the lack of tested QB experience is going to be a big factor for $C. Not sure how the OL is going to look either. And weren't they recently relying on a Penn St. RB transfer? Silas Redd is no world-beater. But you never know when a team is going to catch fire despite their coach.
Exactly. Breaking in a new QB is a big one and it's one of several big reasons one might expect $¢ to take a step back. But I laugh at how so many pundits are still spellbound by the program's tradition. I've seen them ranked top 10 in several preseason polls (Phil Steele's being one of them). Even Vegas sees Stanford as an underdog in the Coliseum on Nov. 16.
06-12-2013, 12:28 AM
If things go swimmingly well for $C, maybe they'll find their groove by Nov. 16th...who knows. But if they lose their starting center in game two of the season...
06-12-2013, 03:43 AM
USC has so little depth that they can't afford to have full contact practices. That hurts game preparation. When you add to the mix it isn't just Oregon who is running no huddle offense in the PAC-12, that impacts in-game performance. Cal, Washington State, Arizona, and UCLA all will go no huddle to get as many snaps as possible, and I'm fairly confident every team playing USC will be more than willing to increase the number of snaps per game to take advantage of the that thin depth.
It's hard to say lack of QB experience will hurt so much after seeing Stanford win a Rose Bowl with two QBs who had never taken a snap before the 2012 season. The general lack of talented depth with experience will be far more of an issue, IMO. I'm hoping they go 0-12, but I'd settle for 8-4.
It's hard to say lack of QB experience will hurt so much after seeing Stanford win a Rose Bowl with two QBs who had never taken a snap before the 2012 season. The general lack of talented depth with experience will be far more of an issue, IMO. I'm hoping they go 0-12, but I'd settle for 8-4.
USC has so little depth that they can't afford to have full contact practices. That hurts game preparation. When you add to the mix it isn't just Oregon who is running no huddle offense in the PAC-12, that impacts in-game performance. Cal, Washington State, Arizona, and UCLA all will go no huddle to get as many snaps as possible, and I'm fairly confident every team playing USC will be more than willing to increase the number of snaps per game to take advantage of the that thin depth.
It's hard to say lack of QB experience will hurt so much after seeing Stanford win a Rose Bowl with two QBs who had never taken a snap before the 2012 season. The general lack of talented depth with experience will be far more of an issue, IMO. I'm hoping they go 0-12, but I'd settle for 8-4.
It's hard to say lack of QB experience will hurt so much after seeing Stanford win a Rose Bowl with two QBs who had never taken a snap before the 2012 season. The general lack of talented depth with experience will be far more of an issue, IMO. I'm hoping they go 0-12, but I'd settle for 8-4.
06-12-2013, 04:00 AM
I think see them beating Hawai'i (maybe--it's an away game), Boston College, and Utah State. I don't think a win at the Univ. of South Bend's in the cards for them this year (in South Bend). So at least 2 wins should come out of their non-conference sched. They should beat WSU, right? They get Utah at home and Colorado on the road--probably two wins for them there as well. So...5 wins on the season, I think.
I think see them beating Hawai'i (maybe--it's an away game), Boston College, and Utah State. I don't think a win at the Univ. of South Bend's in the cards for them this year (in South Bend). So at least 2 wins should come out of their non-conference sched. They should beat WSU, right? They get Utah at home and Colorado on the road--probably two wins for them there as well. So...5 wins on the season, I think.
06-12-2013, 01:13 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-12-2013, 01:14 PM by AlbanyCardinal.)
(06-12-2013, 03:43 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:It's hard to say lack of QB experience will hurt so much after seeing Stanford win a Rose Bowl with two QBs who had never taken a snap before the 2012 season. The general lack of talented depth with experience will be far more of an issue, IMO. I'm hoping they go 0-12, but I'd settle for 8-4.
Does $¢ have the D that got Stanford's offense (with both Nunes and Hogan at the helm) out of trouble? Does $¢ have the offensive line that Stanford does, to help ease in a young QB? I think a host of factors can compound a new QB's problems. But, on the other hand, we have seen an alarming number of RS frosh take the reins and turn teams around.
Bottom line, I think the combo of depth, breaking in young players at several key positions, and the coaching will conspire to make this year pretty forgettable for the t_rojans. I was surprised last year when pundits were drooling over $¢, but I'm amazed this season.
(This post was last modified: 06-12-2013, 01:14 PM by AlbanyCardinal.)
(06-12-2013, 03:43 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:It's hard to say lack of QB experience will hurt so much after seeing Stanford win a Rose Bowl with two QBs who had never taken a snap before the 2012 season. The general lack of talented depth with experience will be far more of an issue, IMO. I'm hoping they go 0-12, but I'd settle for 8-4.
Does $¢ have the D that got Stanford's offense (with both Nunes and Hogan at the helm) out of trouble? Does $¢ have the offensive line that Stanford does, to help ease in a young QB? I think a host of factors can compound a new QB's problems. But, on the other hand, we have seen an alarming number of RS frosh take the reins and turn teams around.
Bottom line, I think the combo of depth, breaking in young players at several key positions, and the coaching will conspire to make this year pretty forgettable for the t_rojans. I was surprised last year when pundits were drooling over $¢, but I'm amazed this season.
StanFan88
Unregistered
Unregistered
06-18-2013, 02:52 PM
I like Under Stanford Control, but I'm going to go with my son's name instead:
University of SEVENTH Choice
University of SEVENTH Choice
I like Under Stanford Control, but I'm going to go with my son's name instead:
University of SEVENTH Choice
University of SEVENTH Choice
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »