[FarmBoy]

Nor Low APR U's Almost Gryphens 

what hath god (or the admin in this case) wrought?

[FarmBoy]

Nor Low APR U's Almost Gryphens 

what hath god (or the admin in this case) wrought?

[admin]

NorCal

[admin]

NorCal

[Simas]

    Cardinal 30

    u$c      15

[Simas]

    Cardinal 30

    u$c      15

[washingtonismoney]

Not putting in the vegas prediction, Gauss?

[washingtonismoney]

Not putting in the vegas prediction, Gauss?

[Gauss]

Not putting in the vegas prediction, Gauss?

I was just thinking about this, as I'd like to be able to compare our performance against the wise men of Vegas. But first of all, do we have it for the Davis game?
Also, shouldn't we go with the prediction a day before the game? That way they'd have similar information that we have when we make our predictions.

[Gauss]

Not putting in the vegas prediction, Gauss?

I was just thinking about this, as I'd like to be able to compare our performance against the wise men of Vegas. But first of all, do we have it for the Davis game?
Also, shouldn't we go with the prediction a day before the game? That way they'd have similar information that we have when we make our predictions.

[washingtonismoney]

I was just thinking about this, as I'd like to be able to compare our performance against the wise men of Vegas. But first of all, do we have it for the Davis game?

Had the line (-42.5), but not the total, according to Vegas Insider. (http://www.vegasinsider.com/college-foot...m/stanford)

Also, shouldn't we go with the prediction a day before the game? That way they'd have similar information that we have when we make our predictions.

Hm, I like doing Vegas's initial line -- since it's Vegas alone, rather than Vegas + wisdom of betting crowds. Would be interesting to do both.

[washingtonismoney]

I was just thinking about this, as I'd like to be able to compare our performance against the wise men of Vegas. But first of all, do we have it for the Davis game?

Had the line (-42.5), but not the total, according to Vegas Insider. (http://www.vegasinsider.com/college-foot...m/stanford)

Also, shouldn't we go with the prediction a day before the game? That way they'd have similar information that we have when we make our predictions.

Hm, I like doing Vegas's initial line -- since it's Vegas alone, rather than Vegas + wisdom of betting crowds. Would be interesting to do both.

[CTcard]

So nervous about this game. 

Stanford 30, UofSC 28. 

... The LSJUMB plays Tribute to Troy while we line up in the victory formation. 

So nervous you have the LSJUMB playing That Only Song They Know ... really?



But on to the predictions.

Heraclean Sackers of Troy 20
Gullible Gift Horse Recipients 10


We find out that our heroic defensive effort vs Davis was not a mirage and we really do have another top defense that stifles the trojies.

Unfortunately, we also find out that the current limited development of our offensive line was also not a mirage, and the offense sputters much of the time. Short fields courtesy of the defense and return teams prove to be enough.

[CTcard]

So nervous about this game. 

Stanford 30, UofSC 28. 

... The LSJUMB plays Tribute to Troy while we line up in the victory formation. 

So nervous you have the LSJUMB playing That Only Song They Know ... really?



But on to the predictions.

Heraclean Sackers of Troy 20
Gullible Gift Horse Recipients 10


We find out that our heroic defensive effort vs Davis was not a mirage and we really do have another top defense that stifles the trojies.

Unfortunately, we also find out that the current limited development of our offensive line was also not a mirage, and the offense sputters much of the time. Short fields courtesy of the defense and return teams prove to be enough.

[czaja]

I have a feeling this will be a bit higher scoring than the past couple of years.

Stanford 31
SC        24

[czaja]

I have a feeling this will be a bit higher scoring than the past couple of years.

Stanford 31
SC        24

[djones]

45 20
They score 13 un answered points to make me right!

[djones]

45 20
They score 13 un answered points to make me right!

[Mick]

stanford 28
sc  27

[Mick]

stanford 28
sc  27

[indiancardinal]

Stanford 31
U.S.C.    24

Our defense will contribute at least 7 pts. It will be the difference in this game

U.S.C. new HUNH will not be able to run 85 plays.

[indiancardinal]

Stanford 31
U.S.C.    24

Our defense will contribute at least 7 pts. It will be the difference in this game

U.S.C. new HUNH will not be able to run 85 plays.

[fullmetal]

Stanford 30, U$C 16.

[fullmetal]

Stanford 30, U$C 16.

[ColoradoTree]

[quote author=ColoradoTree link=topic=10516.msg96403#msg96403 date=1409779819]
So nervous about this game.  In the end, I'll say that our depth will win out, but this game still terrifies me. 

Stanford 30, UofSC 28. 

Though we'll be trailing 21-16 at the break (3 first-half FGs and 1 TD for the good guys; 3 TDs for the bad guys), we get an early 4Q TD to pull ahead 24-21 (2-pt conversion succeeds), only to see the bad guys get a TD with just a few minutes left to go up 28-24.  Hogan methodically leads our guys down the field with lots of mid-range passes to our TEs and to Cajuste and throws to Sanders/Young/McCaffrey in the flat.  On 3rd and goal from the 2, we line up in a jumbo package with no WRs, the bad guys sell out against the run up the middle, BUT WAIT--Hogan keeps it and runs to the right, and a lone OLB is forced to choose between covering the TE running right behind him and running up to stop Hogan's run.  He stays in coverage a second too long, and Hogan beats him to the corner for the go-ahead score.  We go for two, but the run comes up just short, leaving UofSC with just under a minute to try for a winning FG.  Williamson's kickoff is deep, but our coverage team picks the worst possible time to give up a big return, and UofSC brings the return to the 40, giving us all heartburn.  Kessler moves UofSC to our 40 quickly, but tries to thread the needle on a pass to get into field goal range, and we get the game-sealing INT.  The LSJUMB plays Tribute to Troy while we line up in the victory formation.  We all exhale.  We're exhausted, but we're also 2-0.

I'll say we're exhausted. I'm exhausted just reading this!
[/quote]

My blood pressure spiked just writing it!

[ColoradoTree]

[quote author=ColoradoTree link=topic=10516.msg96403#msg96403 date=1409779819]
So nervous about this game.  In the end, I'll say that our depth will win out, but this game still terrifies me. 

Stanford 30, UofSC 28. 

Though we'll be trailing 21-16 at the break (3 first-half FGs and 1 TD for the good guys; 3 TDs for the bad guys), we get an early 4Q TD to pull ahead 24-21 (2-pt conversion succeeds), only to see the bad guys get a TD with just a few minutes left to go up 28-24.  Hogan methodically leads our guys down the field with lots of mid-range passes to our TEs and to Cajuste and throws to Sanders/Young/McCaffrey in the flat.  On 3rd and goal from the 2, we line up in a jumbo package with no WRs, the bad guys sell out against the run up the middle, BUT WAIT--Hogan keeps it and runs to the right, and a lone OLB is forced to choose between covering the TE running right behind him and running up to stop Hogan's run.  He stays in coverage a second too long, and Hogan beats him to the corner for the go-ahead score.  We go for two, but the run comes up just short, leaving UofSC with just under a minute to try for a winning FG.  Williamson's kickoff is deep, but our coverage team picks the worst possible time to give up a big return, and UofSC brings the return to the 40, giving us all heartburn.  Kessler moves UofSC to our 40 quickly, but tries to thread the needle on a pass to get into field goal range, and we get the game-sealing INT.  The LSJUMB plays Tribute to Troy while we line up in the victory formation.  We all exhale.  We're exhausted, but we're also 2-0.

I'll say we're exhausted. I'm exhausted just reading this!
[/quote]

My blood pressure spiked just writing it!

[ColoradoTree]

ferrari -
  THAT was a very good promo!  I'm psyched!  I think I'm peaking too early.  I'll be exhausted by kickoff.

ColoradoTree -
  Had to "upvote" that descriptor.  For the sake of my continued existence I hope you are not even close to being correct.

Thanks, CornFed.  I dearly hope I'm wrong and we win handily (or at least more handily than I predicted).  Of course, if we're clinging to a narrow lead with seconds left, I hope I'm right on the money!

Here's a thought: winning a close game in such nail-biting fashion could be great for Stanford's season.  Pros: Hogan gains tons of confidence points by leading a game-winning drive against such a tough opponent; the OL jells* much faster than projected because, again, confidence points; defense gaining confidence points for closing the door in such an exciting fashion; the national media would fawn over our grit because winning close games feeds into our "we're built to win in the 4th quarter" narrative; it would just crush U.SC, which would be delightful; Sark would probably find something to complain about, which would also be delightful.  Cons: All of Stanford's fans would be dead from stress-related heart attacks. 

*This doesn't look right, but "gels" looks wrong, too.  Most stylebooks seem agnostic on the question, and dictionaries suggest that both "jell" and "gel" are correct in this instance.  I went with "jell" because I'm told that the AP Stylebook prefers it.  #showyourwork

[ColoradoTree]

ferrari -
  THAT was a very good promo!  I'm psyched!  I think I'm peaking too early.  I'll be exhausted by kickoff.

ColoradoTree -
  Had to "upvote" that descriptor.  For the sake of my continued existence I hope you are not even close to being correct.

Thanks, CornFed.  I dearly hope I'm wrong and we win handily (or at least more handily than I predicted).  Of course, if we're clinging to a narrow lead with seconds left, I hope I'm right on the money!

Here's a thought: winning a close game in such nail-biting fashion could be great for Stanford's season.  Pros: Hogan gains tons of confidence points by leading a game-winning drive against such a tough opponent; the OL jells* much faster than projected because, again, confidence points; defense gaining confidence points for closing the door in such an exciting fashion; the national media would fawn over our grit because winning close games feeds into our "we're built to win in the 4th quarter" narrative; it would just crush U.SC, which would be delightful; Sark would probably find something to complain about, which would also be delightful.  Cons: All of Stanford's fans would be dead from stress-related heart attacks. 

*This doesn't look right, but "gels" looks wrong, too.  Most stylebooks seem agnostic on the question, and dictionaries suggest that both "jell" and "gel" are correct in this instance.  I went with "jell" because I'm told that the AP Stylebook prefers it.  #showyourwork

[StanFan88]

Stanford 35
University of Fake Drowning Nephews 27

[StanFan88]

Stanford 35
University of Fake Drowning Nephews 27

[BostonCard]

23 - 10

I still think we score a safety.

BC

[BostonCard]

23 - 10

I still think we score a safety.

BC

[teejers1]

Goodgrief, great post!  If I did up arrows likes or whatever they're called, I'd give you one.  But they're stupid . . . so I didn't.
But great post!

I also don't do predictions.
But am extremely nervous/psyched about Saturday's game.

P.S.  Also love all the creative names given to Stanford and S.C. in these predictions.  You guys are good . . .

[teejers1]

Goodgrief, great post!  If I did up arrows likes or whatever they're called, I'd give you one.  But they're stupid . . . so I didn't.
But great post!

I also don't do predictions.
But am extremely nervous/psyched about Saturday's game.

P.S.  Also love all the creative names given to Stanford and S.C. in these predictions.  You guys are good . . .

[ahuang06]

45-31 - barnburner win for Stanford!

[ahuang06]

45-31 - barnburner win for Stanford!

[socalstanfan1]

Stanford 23

USC 17

[socalstanfan1]

Stanford 23

USC 17

[Hank 91]

Stanford, 34-17.

[Hank 91]

Stanford, 34-17.