[Mick]

Back when Stanford football was really good, wasn't there a Cardboarder who picked Stanford to lose every game, regardless of the opponent? I think it was to appease the woofing gods.

Longwinded?

[Mick]

Back when Stanford football was really good, wasn't there a Cardboarder who picked Stanford to lose every game, regardless of the opponent? I think it was to appease the woofing gods.

Longwinded?

[BostonCard]

Both Sagarin and ESPN's FPI favor Stanford.  Just say'n.

Based on what, exactly?  Without data to make their predictions on, ultimately, they just default to the same thing all of us are using, human opinion.

BC

[BostonCard]

Both Sagarin and ESPN's FPI favor Stanford.  Just say'n.

Based on what, exactly?  Without data to make their predictions on, ultimately, they just default to the same thing all of us are using, human opinion.

BC

[oman]

Based on what, exactly?  Without data to make their predictions on, ultimately, they just default to the same thing all of us are using, human opinion.

BC

Augurably with some help from possum innards.

---

Stanford 31
K-State 17

[oman]

Based on what, exactly?  Without data to make their predictions on, ultimately, they just default to the same thing all of us are using, human opinion.

BC

Augurably with some help from possum innards.

---

Stanford 31
K-State 17

[LDN/SG Card]

24-16 to the good guys....

[LDN/SG Card]

24-16 to the good guys....

[GoodGrief]

Stanford 24
KSU 23

We score exactly how we currently rank

[GoodGrief]

Stanford 24
KSU 23

We score exactly how we currently rank

[Austroturf]

The question mark at QB makes me pessimistic.  I tend to think McKee is the future, but Shaw probably won't start him.  West most likely gets the nod, and I predict we get into a hole that we don't quite climb out of by the end of the game.  35-28 KSU.  Or it could be much more low-scoring than this.  Somehow, there's a bit of a Northwestern 2015 vibe to this game.

[Austroturf]

The question mark at QB makes me pessimistic.  I tend to think McKee is the future, but Shaw probably won't start him.  West most likely gets the nod, and I predict we get into a hole that we don't quite climb out of by the end of the game.  35-28 KSU.  Or it could be much more low-scoring than this.  Somehow, there's a bit of a Northwestern 2015 vibe to this game.

[murky]

Am I the only one who thinks that maybe its a good sign a starter hasn't been made?  Maybe it means McKee is really good, because we all know Shaw leans toward the one who has more experience with and mastery of managing the game.

He didn't default to West.

[murky]

Am I the only one who thinks that maybe its a good sign a starter hasn't been made?  Maybe it means McKee is really good, because we all know Shaw leans toward the one who has more experience with and mastery of managing the game.

He didn't default to West.

[thunder_chik]

Us 23, Them 20 sounds about right.


Note: Somehow I missed the widget and did not input this prediction. Oops

[thunder_chik]

Us 23, Them 20 sounds about right.


Note: Somehow I missed the widget and did not input this prediction. Oops

[Austroturf]

Am I the only one who thinks that maybe its a good sign a starter hasn't been made?  Maybe it means McKee is really good, because we all know Shaw leans toward the one who has more experience with and mastery of managing the game.

He didn't default to West.

You could be right.  That said, if McKee is really good, then Shaw should start him, even if he is lacking experience.  I just don't think Shaw will take that risk.  I predict he will go with West for the first quarter and a half and play Shawball, with lots of carries for Jones and Peat.  Then when we are trailing 14-3, he will put in McKee to give the offense a spark.  Just a hunch, but I could also be dead wrong on this.  Let's see.  Mckee went on a Mormon mission, so he is already 21 coming into his redshirt freshman year.  Academically, he is already a sophomore, so if he is good, Shaw should play him now.  Judging from other recent cases (Simi Fehoko), McKee is likely to declare for the NFL draft after the 2022 season (provided he has the stats and buzz around his name).  When Fehoko signed in 2016, there were high expectations for his tenure as a Cardinal after his Mormon mission.  And he did not disappoint; but Stanford only got one good, but abbreviated season out of him (2020), then he went pro.  Will McKee be a similar story?

[Austroturf]

Am I the only one who thinks that maybe its a good sign a starter hasn't been made?  Maybe it means McKee is really good, because we all know Shaw leans toward the one who has more experience with and mastery of managing the game.

He didn't default to West.

You could be right.  That said, if McKee is really good, then Shaw should start him, even if he is lacking experience.  I just don't think Shaw will take that risk.  I predict he will go with West for the first quarter and a half and play Shawball, with lots of carries for Jones and Peat.  Then when we are trailing 14-3, he will put in McKee to give the offense a spark.  Just a hunch, but I could also be dead wrong on this.  Let's see.  Mckee went on a Mormon mission, so he is already 21 coming into his redshirt freshman year.  Academically, he is already a sophomore, so if he is good, Shaw should play him now.  Judging from other recent cases (Simi Fehoko), McKee is likely to declare for the NFL draft after the 2022 season (provided he has the stats and buzz around his name).  When Fehoko signed in 2016, there were high expectations for his tenure as a Cardinal after his Mormon mission.  And he did not disappoint; but Stanford only got one good, but abbreviated season out of him (2020), then he went pro.  Will McKee be a similar story?

[BostonCard]

Am I the only one who thinks that maybe its a good sign a starter hasn't been made?  Maybe it means McKee is really good, because we all know Shaw leans toward the one who has more experience with and mastery of managing the game.

He didn't default to West.

I believe the term for this is "motivated reasoning".

BC

[BostonCard]

Am I the only one who thinks that maybe its a good sign a starter hasn't been made?  Maybe it means McKee is really good, because we all know Shaw leans toward the one who has more experience with and mastery of managing the game.

He didn't default to West.

I believe the term for this is "motivated reasoning".

BC

[CTcard]

A few comments on topics in this thread:

As far as I can tell, the Stanford internet-board fan base, seems to have the least pro home team bias I have seen. I don't think you'd find many other fan bases cumulatively predicting even up chances for a game where the something like ESPN FPI predicts that home team to be the favourite.
[Note - home team to the fan base, not home for a particular game.]

This year far more than most, there is little basis for making any prediction at all. Last year is pretty much useless for projecting forward. Two years ago is far too long. There are still uneven levels of response to the pandemic that makes it hard to understand a given team's situation. Thus at this point any predictions for success or failure of our team are more Rohrschach tests for the predictor's personality than anything about the team.

Whether you call it Shawball or not, the current default mode for the Stanford offense appears to be to run the ball rarely relative to other teams. Over the past four years, Stanford has been #10, #11, #11, and #9 in the conference in rushing attempts per game. It would be logical for any coach with an uncertain QB situation to try to throw less, but I wonder whether that is really what we will see or not. If the run game is successful from the opening gun, then we'll likely keep at it. If it struggles initially, I suspect we'll go all pass - which scares me.

Shaw's history of QB selection is more complicated than simply favoring the older guy, though in the end he has repeatedly started seasons with an older guy and switched to the younger guy midway: 20212 Hogan took over from Nunes, 2016 Chryst from Burns, 2017 Costello from Chryst, 2019 Mills from Costello. The situation now seems closer to 2012 than any of the others.

As to my own Rohrschach test, I'm a worrier ...
The early start and travel conditions lead Stanford to perform very poorly consistent with a long history of that sort of thing.
Stanford 16, KSU 27
A very grumpy board Saturday afternoon.

[By the way, is there an official prediction contest this year, or just a thread for our amusement?]

[CTcard]

A few comments on topics in this thread:

As far as I can tell, the Stanford internet-board fan base, seems to have the least pro home team bias I have seen. I don't think you'd find many other fan bases cumulatively predicting even up chances for a game where the something like ESPN FPI predicts that home team to be the favourite.
[Note - home team to the fan base, not home for a particular game.]

This year far more than most, there is little basis for making any prediction at all. Last year is pretty much useless for projecting forward. Two years ago is far too long. There are still uneven levels of response to the pandemic that makes it hard to understand a given team's situation. Thus at this point any predictions for success or failure of our team are more Rohrschach tests for the predictor's personality than anything about the team.

Whether you call it Shawball or not, the current default mode for the Stanford offense appears to be to run the ball rarely relative to other teams. Over the past four years, Stanford has been #10, #11, #11, and #9 in the conference in rushing attempts per game. It would be logical for any coach with an uncertain QB situation to try to throw less, but I wonder whether that is really what we will see or not. If the run game is successful from the opening gun, then we'll likely keep at it. If it struggles initially, I suspect we'll go all pass - which scares me.

Shaw's history of QB selection is more complicated than simply favoring the older guy, though in the end he has repeatedly started seasons with an older guy and switched to the younger guy midway: 20212 Hogan took over from Nunes, 2016 Chryst from Burns, 2017 Costello from Chryst, 2019 Mills from Costello. The situation now seems closer to 2012 than any of the others.

As to my own Rohrschach test, I'm a worrier ...
The early start and travel conditions lead Stanford to perform very poorly consistent with a long history of that sort of thing.
Stanford 16, KSU 27
A very grumpy board Saturday afternoon.

[By the way, is there an official prediction contest this year, or just a thread for our amusement?]

[Leftcoast]

Stanford 24, K-State 20

I almost reversed those scores but fans are biased toward optimism until the games start, right?

[Leftcoast]

Stanford 24, K-State 20

I almost reversed those scores but fans are biased toward optimism until the games start, right?

[ADPinWDC]

TREES 30, KATS 21 -- We get 3 TDs and 3 FGs with Kapable Karty.  
* Behind a strong O-Line, our new QB is fine, especially with A) A loaded backfield; B) Good targets to throw to that make plays.  
-- Around the country, plenty of first time QBs do fine right out of the box; look what frosh Slovis did to us in 2019: 28 on 33 with 377yds, 3TDs. 
-- In H.S. at powerhouse Corona Centennial, McKee had a better career than A.Luck.  Shaw will bring him up a ramp.  
* K-State is a two-man team:  QB Thompson, and bowling ball Vaughn at RB.  I think our LBs stop them enough of the time.  
-- Kats have decent receivers, not great, and lost talent at WR.  
* The Cardinal D-Line is better than their average O-Line, even though we are not deep.  
-- Lance Anderson will have fresh LBs for all four Quarters, so that means BLITZ to take pressure off the secondary. 
* Our Corners are good enough to stay with Kats, not with USC.   Likewise the Safeties.  
* We could get a score off the Defense, or maybe two picks.  Force Kats into 3rd-and-long enough, I think we get INTs.

[ADPinWDC]

TREES 30, KATS 21 -- We get 3 TDs and 3 FGs with Kapable Karty.  
* Behind a strong O-Line, our new QB is fine, especially with A) A loaded backfield; B) Good targets to throw to that make plays.  
-- Around the country, plenty of first time QBs do fine right out of the box; look what frosh Slovis did to us in 2019: 28 on 33 with 377yds, 3TDs. 
-- In H.S. at powerhouse Corona Centennial, McKee had a better career than A.Luck.  Shaw will bring him up a ramp.  
* K-State is a two-man team:  QB Thompson, and bowling ball Vaughn at RB.  I think our LBs stop them enough of the time.  
-- Kats have decent receivers, not great, and lost talent at WR.  
* The Cardinal D-Line is better than their average O-Line, even though we are not deep.  
-- Lance Anderson will have fresh LBs for all four Quarters, so that means BLITZ to take pressure off the secondary. 
* Our Corners are good enough to stay with Kats, not with USC.   Likewise the Safeties.  
* We could get a score off the Defense, or maybe two picks.  Force Kats into 3rd-and-long enough, I think we get INTs.

[winflop]

With STM and McGill out, I revised my prediction to 35-23 KSU. They have a veteran QB who can spread the ball around. Our thin DBs are now down 2 starters, leaving Shaw to start multiple complete unknowns. Does not give me confidence in our ability to stop their offense at all.

[winflop]

With STM and McGill out, I revised my prediction to 35-23 KSU. They have a veteran QB who can spread the ball around. Our thin DBs are now down 2 starters, leaving Shaw to start multiple complete unknowns. Does not give me confidence in our ability to stop their offense at all.

[gailtate]

A few comments on topics in this thread:

As far as I can tell, the Stanford internet-board fan base, seems to have the least pro home team bias I have seen. I don't think you'd find many other fan bases cumulatively predicting even up chances for a game where the something like ESPN FPI predicts that home team to be the favourite.
[Note - home team to the fan base, not home for a particular game.]

This year far more than most, there is little basis for making any prediction at all. Last year is pretty much useless for projecting forward. Two years ago is far too long. There are still uneven levels of response to the pandemic that makes it hard to understand a given team's situation. Thus at this point any predictions for success or failure of our team are more Rohrschach tests for the predictor's personality than anything about the team.

Whether you call it Shawball or not, the current default mode for the Stanford offense appears to be to run the ball rarely relative to other teams. Over the past four years, Stanford has been #10, #11, #11, and #9 in the conference in rushing attempts per game. It would be logical for any coach with an uncertain QB situation to try to throw less, but I wonder whether that is really what we will see or not. If the run game is successful from the opening gun, then we'll likely keep at it. If it struggles initially, I suspect we'll go all pass - which scares me.

Shaw's history of QB selection is more complicated than simply favoring the older guy, though in the end he has repeatedly started seasons with an older guy and switched to the younger guy midway: 20212 Hogan took over from Nunes, 2016 Chryst from Burns, 2017 Costello from Chryst, 2019 Mills from Costello. The situation now seems closer to 2012 than any of the others.

As to my own Rohrschach test, I'm a worrier ...
The early start and travel conditions lead Stanford to perform very poorly consistent with a long history of that sort of thing.
Stanford 16, KSU 27
A very grumpy board Saturday afternoon.

[By the way, is there an official prediction contest this year, or just a thread for our amusement?]

Hah!  I WISH the situation were "more like 2012". Looks more like 2019 to some of us. Pray that injuries don't rear their ugly heads. This is the thinnest outfit in recent memory. Pitiful. I'm talking DEFENSE. The thing that wins games. Ask kal fans who experienced the Dykes Dynasty.

[gailtate]

A few comments on topics in this thread:

As far as I can tell, the Stanford internet-board fan base, seems to have the least pro home team bias I have seen. I don't think you'd find many other fan bases cumulatively predicting even up chances for a game where the something like ESPN FPI predicts that home team to be the favourite.
[Note - home team to the fan base, not home for a particular game.]

This year far more than most, there is little basis for making any prediction at all. Last year is pretty much useless for projecting forward. Two years ago is far too long. There are still uneven levels of response to the pandemic that makes it hard to understand a given team's situation. Thus at this point any predictions for success or failure of our team are more Rohrschach tests for the predictor's personality than anything about the team.

Whether you call it Shawball or not, the current default mode for the Stanford offense appears to be to run the ball rarely relative to other teams. Over the past four years, Stanford has been #10, #11, #11, and #9 in the conference in rushing attempts per game. It would be logical for any coach with an uncertain QB situation to try to throw less, but I wonder whether that is really what we will see or not. If the run game is successful from the opening gun, then we'll likely keep at it. If it struggles initially, I suspect we'll go all pass - which scares me.

Shaw's history of QB selection is more complicated than simply favoring the older guy, though in the end he has repeatedly started seasons with an older guy and switched to the younger guy midway: 20212 Hogan took over from Nunes, 2016 Chryst from Burns, 2017 Costello from Chryst, 2019 Mills from Costello. The situation now seems closer to 2012 than any of the others.

As to my own Rohrschach test, I'm a worrier ...
The early start and travel conditions lead Stanford to perform very poorly consistent with a long history of that sort of thing.
Stanford 16, KSU 27
A very grumpy board Saturday afternoon.

[By the way, is there an official prediction contest this year, or just a thread for our amusement?]

Hah!  I WISH the situation were "more like 2012". Looks more like 2019 to some of us. Pray that injuries don't rear their ugly heads. This is the thinnest outfit in recent memory. Pitiful. I'm talking DEFENSE. The thing that wins games. Ask kal fans who experienced the Dykes Dynasty.

[winflop]

Pray that injuries don't rear their ugly heads.

Too late. Season hasn't kicked off yet and already down 3 starters.

[winflop]

Pray that injuries don't rear their ugly heads.

Too late. Season hasn't kicked off yet and already down 3 starters.

[BostonCard]

I think CTCard is referring to the QB situation.  So, maybe a better analog would be the 2012 offense with the 2019 defense.

BC

[BostonCard]

I think CTCard is referring to the QB situation.  So, maybe a better analog would be the 2012 offense with the 2019 defense.

BC

[BostonCard]

A few comments on topics in this thread:

As far as I can tell, the Stanford internet-board fan base, seems to have the least pro home team bias I have seen. I don't think you'd find many other fan bases cumulatively predicting even up chances for a game where the something like ESPN FPI predicts that home team to be the favourite.

[By the way, is there an official prediction contest this year, or just a thread for our amusement?]

The line is KState -3.5, and the aggregate board’s predictions are for a tie, 24-24 with about 30-odd presictions, so we are about 3.5 points more optimistic about the team than the betting public. I’m guessing that’s on the low side for fan boards, but I have little experience outside here.

The top of this thread has the prediction contest entry.

BC

[BostonCard]

A few comments on topics in this thread:

As far as I can tell, the Stanford internet-board fan base, seems to have the least pro home team bias I have seen. I don't think you'd find many other fan bases cumulatively predicting even up chances for a game where the something like ESPN FPI predicts that home team to be the favourite.

[By the way, is there an official prediction contest this year, or just a thread for our amusement?]

The line is KState -3.5, and the aggregate board’s predictions are for a tie, 24-24 with about 30-odd presictions, so we are about 3.5 points more optimistic about the team than the betting public. I’m guessing that’s on the low side for fan boards, but I have little experience outside here.

The top of this thread has the prediction contest entry.

BC

[Snorlax94]

The line is KState -3.5, and the aggregate board’s predictions are for a tie, 24-24 with about 30-odd presictions, so we are about 3.5 points more optimistic about the team than the betting public. I’m guessing that’s on the low side for fan boards, but I have little experience outside here.

The top of this thread has the prediction contest entry.

BC

After watching highlights from Thursday's games, I updated my prediction to 35-31, Cardinal (from 28-24, Cardinal). 

One of big questions is to remember this is still the Covid+1 year, so I don't expect football to follow the usual rules from typical years.

I'm seeing a lot of high-scoring games. The highlights of Ohio State - Minnesota weren't about great offense, they were about a lack of defense. Oftentimes defenders got juked and were 5 yards away from the receiver. Granted, the first games often feature mismatches, but Ohio State scored 45, Coastal Carolina scored 52, Utah (!) scored 40, ASU scored 41.

So I expect a Covid-hangover at least for now, which I expect will mean in general, worse defense, poor positioning, blown coverages, poor angles and tackling, lots of long plays.

[Snorlax94]

The line is KState -3.5, and the aggregate board’s predictions are for a tie, 24-24 with about 30-odd presictions, so we are about 3.5 points more optimistic about the team than the betting public. I’m guessing that’s on the low side for fan boards, but I have little experience outside here.

The top of this thread has the prediction contest entry.

BC

After watching highlights from Thursday's games, I updated my prediction to 35-31, Cardinal (from 28-24, Cardinal). 

One of big questions is to remember this is still the Covid+1 year, so I don't expect football to follow the usual rules from typical years.

I'm seeing a lot of high-scoring games. The highlights of Ohio State - Minnesota weren't about great offense, they were about a lack of defense. Oftentimes defenders got juked and were 5 yards away from the receiver. Granted, the first games often feature mismatches, but Ohio State scored 45, Coastal Carolina scored 52, Utah (!) scored 40, ASU scored 41.

So I expect a Covid-hangover at least for now, which I expect will mean in general, worse defense, poor positioning, blown coverages, poor angles and tackling, lots of long plays.

[CTcard]

I think CTCard is referring to the QB situation.  So, maybe a better analog would be the 2012 offense with the 2019 defense.

Wasn't that obvious?


In truth, the two relatively close parallels are 2012 and 2016.
In all three years (2012, 2016, 2021) we were/are dealing with the loss of an established starter entrenched enough that no backups had much experience. In each case there is an academic senior competing to be the next guy, an upperclassman competitor, and a frosh waiting in the wings.

2012 - we thought the competition was between (academic) senior Nunes and junior Nottingham. Nunes got the nod originally, but then RS frosh Hogan took over. Hogan was basically an unknown to the fan base, calls from the fan base for a new QB were almost exclusively for Nottingham.
2016 - the competition was between (academic) senior Burns and junior Chryst. Burns got the nod originally, was eventually supplanted by Chryst.  RS frosh Costello eventually took over, but not until the next year.
2021 - the competition is between (academic) senior West and sophomore McKee. Who knows, maybe frosh Patu (spring enrollee) will eventually take over.


p.s. I don't think the 2012 offense is a particularly good parallel to the 2019 defense.
In 2012, the offense was coming off one of the best years in Stanford history. Lost a bunch of talent from that team, including a QB they had trouble replacing. In the end, the 2012 offense finished #30 in the country in points per drive - a season average and it was better than that after Hogan.
The 2019 defense was following a fairly bad 2018 defense. It got worse, but not drastically so. [It ranked better within the conference in yds allowed per game, but worse in absolute yds; ppd allowed from 1.98 to 2.64] It didn't rely on one position like the offense on QB, and didn't get better at the end of the season by making strides at that one position.

On the other hand, both prompted lots of whining on message boards - they have that in common.

[CTcard]

I think CTCard is referring to the QB situation.  So, maybe a better analog would be the 2012 offense with the 2019 defense.

Wasn't that obvious?


In truth, the two relatively close parallels are 2012 and 2016.
In all three years (2012, 2016, 2021) we were/are dealing with the loss of an established starter entrenched enough that no backups had much experience. In each case there is an academic senior competing to be the next guy, an upperclassman competitor, and a frosh waiting in the wings.

2012 - we thought the competition was between (academic) senior Nunes and junior Nottingham. Nunes got the nod originally, but then RS frosh Hogan took over. Hogan was basically an unknown to the fan base, calls from the fan base for a new QB were almost exclusively for Nottingham.
2016 - the competition was between (academic) senior Burns and junior Chryst. Burns got the nod originally, was eventually supplanted by Chryst.  RS frosh Costello eventually took over, but not until the next year.
2021 - the competition is between (academic) senior West and sophomore McKee. Who knows, maybe frosh Patu (spring enrollee) will eventually take over.


p.s. I don't think the 2012 offense is a particularly good parallel to the 2019 defense.
In 2012, the offense was coming off one of the best years in Stanford history. Lost a bunch of talent from that team, including a QB they had trouble replacing. In the end, the 2012 offense finished #30 in the country in points per drive - a season average and it was better than that after Hogan.
The 2019 defense was following a fairly bad 2018 defense. It got worse, but not drastically so. [It ranked better within the conference in yds allowed per game, but worse in absolute yds; ppd allowed from 1.98 to 2.64] It didn't rely on one position like the offense on QB, and didn't get better at the end of the season by making strides at that one position.

On the other hand, both prompted lots of whining on message boards - they have that in common.