Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . (/thread-23363.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . (/thread-23363.html)
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - msqueri - 08-18-2022
(08-18-2022, 01:53 PM)cctop Wrote:(08-18-2022, 07:05 AM)msqueri Wrote: I've posted tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of words about the upcoming Stanford football season on the two other fan sites I frequent.
Just curious, what are the other two fan sites you frequent?
Rivals (Cardinal Sports Report) and 247 (the shell of what used to be called the Bootleg). My perspective is that the Cardboard and Cardinal Sports Report have the most vibrant and worthwhile communities but I have returned to 247 too because the reporter who covers Stanford alongside Cal, Fresno State, and San Jose State (talk about an indication Stanford football is irrelevant) does an admirable job producing original content. Subscription sites with editors generate content, which can help with the community, but the real coin of the realm for me is conversation and this board does quite well on that score compared to the others.
Mods please feel free to ask me to delete any part of this post if you don't like the competition being discussed, but as this isn't a subscription site I imagine you're less paranoid about that than other sites (and in any case I always found the impulse to jealously guard turf misguided for a fan base where any individual seeking out any content should be welcomed).
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - JJJ - 08-18-2022
https://www.instagram.com/p/ChaZCADvjsC/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=My
https://www.instagram.com/reel/ChbJLkfjeLG/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - BostonCard - 08-18-2022
LOL, we are aware that TOS (the other sites) exist. Some of us may even have been posters/subscribers in some of those sites for a while. I don’t think it would be for me to denigrate any place that provides coverage of Stanford sports. We do offer a money back guarantee though.
BC
leftcoast - Leftcoast - 08-19-2022
Why so few posts? For many of us this off season has left a bitter taste in in our mouths such that simply thinking of the sport reawakens the bile of NIL, death of the PAC-12, and a semi-pro future where young pros wear college logos on their helmets but have no other connection to schools.
I wonder if watching games this season will feel the same? Will the USC game feel like a stadium of fans watching the slow passing of something we once loved? Will the UCLA game take a back seat to fans and media speculating about and fervently hoping for a Big-12 invite? (Gag me!)
Too dramatic, I’m sure but there is little joy in thinking about football right now. It’s not fair to Stanford, certainly not fair to our players, but there it is.
The powers-that-be have really taken a sledge to something fans have loved for generations and I can’t think about our team’s D-Line woes while watching the shards fall. Perhaps better men can.
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - BostonCard - 08-19-2022
I think all of that casts a shadow over the season, no question. But I do think once the season starts, like moths to a flame, we (or perhaps a dwindling subset of us) will be back at it.
BC
Chip.burns@glenborough.com - sunnyside sudser - 08-19-2022
Or to loosely quote the old bootleg from memory
Like a dog returns to its vomit we return to Stanford football
RE: Chip.burns@glenborough.com - gailtate - 08-19-2022
(08-19-2022, 09:22 AM)sunnyside sudser Wrote: Or to loosely quote the old bootleg from memory
Like a dog returns to its vomit we return to Stanford football
And, at this particular moment, the ol' canine metaphor (thanks, Lars) is most appropriate.
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - CTcard - 08-19-2022
(08-18-2022, 11:06 AM)msqueri Wrote: We tried the more four man front thing against Oregon State, Cal, and Notre Dame. Against Oregon State, the run defense was effective and the pass defense was a disaster, albeit without Kelly, McGill, and Manley. Against Cal, we had possibly the worst defensive game in Stanford history and, notably, possibly the worst run defense game in Stanford history. Against Notre Dame, the run defense was actually a relative triumph to end the season but pass defense was a disaster.
At the end of last season, as I got busy and the team quit, I quit paying my usual level of attention. Your note made me go back to those last games.
The description looks quite accurate.
I'd say the run defense against OSU was the best showing of that group. OSU was a good running team last year, and we held them to well under their season average yds/carry.
UND was not a very good running team. We didn't hold them below their average in yds/carry or yds/game, but did do better than UNC, UVa, or Ga Tech. So, being better than anybody on any bit of the defense was probably a relative success.
I was originally thinking your cal comment (worst defensive game in Stanford history) was likely a strong exaggeration, but then I started looking at numbers.
It was the most yds/play (9.97) given up since at least the 2008 season, by a lot.
It was the most yds/game (628) given up since at least the 2008 season, but just barely (Oregon had 626 in 2010).
All time that would be the eighth most yards given up in a game in Stanford history. I don't think I can find number of plays in most of those.
[The most yards given up was ASU in 1981 at 743, where legendary quarterback Make Pagel threw for 511 yards against us, Elway got hurt but combined with Steve Cottrell for a Stanford record 581 passing yards. Here is a Jim Rutter look back at that crazy game: ASU 1981]
Bottom line, is that cal game is at least in the running for the worst defensive performance in the history of Stanford football.
Part of that is cal wasn't a particularly good offensive team: #7 in the conference in both yds/game and yds/play; #76 nationally in yds/game, #60 yds/play.
Yuck.
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - msqueri - 08-19-2022
Yeah, the more I dug into that Cal game the more it appeared to be a genuine contender for both our worst defensive game ever and our worst game ever, period, at least in terms of how much we were dominated on the average play. A few of the thoughts I wrote the morning after:
2. After the Utah game, I pointed out that the yard per play differential (5.4) was not only the worst I was able to find in our history but 23 percent worse than the next worst (4.4 against Notre Dame in 2003). Last night the team was significantly more dominated than even that, a whopping 6.1 yard per differential. This is what I mean when I say possibly the two worst games in Stanford history. I don't know if I can emphasize enough how astounding a 6.1 yard per play differential is. A lot of folks watched Ohio State's 56-7 annihilation of Michigan State yesterday, right? 3.8 yard differential. When Stanford beat Rice 62-7 in Australia that was a 5.1 yard differential. You can't belong on a football field less than Stanford last night. AND THAT WAS AGAINST A FOUR WIN TEAM!
3. The biggest story is the incredible incompetence of the Stanford defense against an offense that came into the game with the #105 scoring offense in the nation. We gave up 10.1 yards per play allowed. Let me say that again: an average of a first down per play. 636 yards is the eighth most we've ever given up in a game (1981 Arizona State, 1999 Washington, 1998 Oregon, 2003 Oregon State, 2005 Notre Dame, 1982 UCLA, 1973 UCLA) but (as coaches of yesteryear didn't intentionally suck the energy out of the game and guarantee there would be so few plays by either team) I suspect it may be the case we've never given up so many yards on so few plays. The all-time worst performances for which stats are available weren't even close: the 1999 Washington game had 7.8 yards per play allowed, 2003 Oregon State was 7.4, and 2005 Notre Dame was 7.5. Hard to put into words how historic a first down allowed per play is. 41 points is a lot to give up too but it could have been much, much worse. The Wade-Perry forced fumble was an awesome, momentum-reversing individual play in which everybody else's failures and how many home runs Cal hit subsequently would have made that another likely Cal house call were it not for that play (and even if he made the tackle a touchdown drive would have of course been likely). And then McGill's interception in the end zone also took points off the board. Those are two of the biggest plays of the season for the Stanford defense and we still gave up 41 points. I just need to say again this was against Cal.
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - relsef - 08-19-2022
(08-18-2022, 06:29 AM)cardcrimson Wrote: Are things that dire. Is the fan base that disinterested in Stanford football? Our athletic department must be proud at the excitement they've generated. . .....hope springs eternal
I'm a bogey golfer and not a good one. I suffer from the yips and the older I get the harder it is for me to find any effective tempo in my swing. I LOVE THE GAME! Not so many years ago I entertained the idea of becoming a golf instructor in my retirement. Now I show up at the local course once a week to play with a bunch of hackers like me. Every once in a while, the game I love to play shows up, for a shot, for a hole, for nine holes, even for 18 holes on rare occasions. I've given up trying to explain it, but it is enough to keep me showing up every week at the course, knowing the game I love is possible. In a similar vein, I have been an avid Stanford football fan for roughly 70 years. l anticipate every season and every game knowing that it is possible that the team I love to watch play will provide the joy and entertainment I seek. Even in the worst of times there have been and will be moments of fulfillment. Pritchard to Bradford for the win happens! It is not wishful thinking. The moments, games, seasons are worth waiting for. 2022 can be one of those!
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - Bampa - 08-19-2022
(08-19-2022, 03:05 PM)relsef Wrote:(08-18-2022, 06:29 AM)cardcrimson Wrote: Are things that dire. Is the fan base that disinterested in Stanford football? Our athletic department must be proud at the excitement they've generated. . .....hope springs eternal
I'm a bogey golfer and not a good one. I suffer from the yips and the older I get the harder it is for me to find any effective tempo in my swing. I LOVE THE GAME! Not so many years ago I entertained the idea of becoming a golf instructor in my retirement. Now I show up at the local course once a week to play with a bunch of hackers like me. Every once in a while, the game I love to play shows up, for a shot, for a hole, for nine holes, even for 18 holes on rare occasions. I've given up trying to explain it, but it is enough to keep me showing up every week at the course, knowing the game I love is possible. In a similar vein, I have been an avid Stanford football fan for roughly 70 years. l anticipate every season and every game knowing that it is possible that the team I love to watch play will provide the joy and entertainment I seek. Even in the worst of times there have been and will be moments of fulfillment. Pritchard to Bradford for the win happens! It is not wishful thinking. The moments, games, seasons are worth waiting for. 2022 can be one of those!
+1
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - BostonCard - 08-19-2022
Thank you for that. It’s a welcome respite from the people who seem to get off on pissing into every one else’s corn flakes (and to be clear, I don’t mean sober assessments of the team’s deficiencies, but rather the johnnie one-notes amongst us).
BC
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - gailtate - 08-19-2022
(08-19-2022, 03:05 PM)relsef Wrote:(08-18-2022, 06:29 AM)cardcrimson Wrote: Are things that dire. Is the fan base that disinterested in Stanford football? Our athletic department must be proud at the excitement they've generated. . .....hope springs eternal
I'm a bogey golfer and not a good one. I suffer from the yips and the older I get the harder it is for me to find any effective tempo in my swing. I LOVE THE GAME! Not so many years ago I entertained the idea of becoming a golf instructor in my retirement. Now I show up at the local course once a week to play with a bunch of hackers like me. Every once in a while, the game I love to play shows up, for a shot, for a hole, for nine holes, even for 18 holes on rare occasions. I've given up trying to explain it, but it is enough to keep me showing up every week at the course, knowing the game I love is possible. In a similar vein, I have been an avid Stanford football fan for roughly 70 years. l anticipate every season and every game knowing that it is possible that the team I love to watch play will provide the joy and entertainment I seek. Even in the worst of times there have been and will be moments of fulfillment. Pritchard to Bradford for the win happens! It is not wishful thinking. The moments, games, seasons are worth waiting for. 2022 can be one of those!
Sure it can, as in "anything is possible". Or, "on any given day..." I see it from a different perspective. One for which I am dismissed for my unapologetic nature. The problem I have in 2022 with perennial swooning over Pritchard-to-Bradford fifteen years ago has something to do with the Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations. For athletes (and coaches). David DeCastro did not accept losing for a minute and his controlled rage eventually paid off, albeit under a new, disruptive regime. I wonder if there are any DeCastros on this roster. There sure as hell isn't any EUTM on the sidelines.
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - Phogge - 08-19-2022
Yeah, the Cal game was the worst ever.
The 72-0 UCLA win in 1954 with eight INT's was much better.
L O F****** L
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - BobK - 08-19-2022
I would say our OLcoach was very EUTM today but then I was at practice so what do I know. Also quite vocal was David Shaw
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - newguy - 08-19-2022
i may get slammed for this, but i still believe that we should consider asking for volunteers among our offensive linemen to switch over to defense.....not necessarily for this season, but for next.
yes i know we have guys in the pipeline.
it's just an idea.
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - cardcrimson - 08-19-2022
Are you enthusiastic about what you saw?
(08-19-2022, 05:17 PM)BobK Wrote: I would say our OLcoach was very EUTM today but then I was at practice so what do I know. Also quite vocal was David Shaw
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - Row80Critic - 08-19-2022
(08-18-2022, 08:55 AM)BobK Wrote: I used to post about practices on the bootleg. Usually about the Frosh. About 2007 I posted how walk on Frosh Ryan Whalen would play a lot for Stanford. Boy did posters laugh. Remember that Matt ?
Yes I was right
Yes I believe Stanford will be 8-4 and a bowl game
On September 10, 2021, while many were predicting embarrassment and disaster against #14 USC, I posted this about the USC game:
Stanford will smoke these guys, 38-21. McKee will wow the country and be put on multiple watch lists. Kyu Blu will lock down half the field, have a pick-6, and make Slovis second-guess all passes. The offensive line will gel big time, and NFL scouts will start looking at Fisk for their d-lines. Shaw will become wildly unpredictable on both sides of the ball, and we'll see everything from old-school option plays to spurts of pass-happy no-huddle. It will be a glorious day.
The next day Stanford smoked those guys, 42-28. McKee wowed the country and went on multiple watch lists. Kyu Blu Kelly locked down half the field, had a pick-6, and made Slovis second-guess all passes. The offensive line gelled to the tune of 375 yards, Tucker Fisk signed with the Falcons, and Shaw was as unpredictable as we've ever seen him (taking points and a lead off the board against USC)! It was a VERY glorious day. So glorious that USC promptly fired Helton.
What's my point? Sometimes the optimists are right. This team has all the tools to stay in every game they will play, every game. So if Bob K says they'll go 8-4, I'll tip my cap to my fellow optimist. With 53 seasons under my belt, I've learned to never expect the expected....
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - d4cohn - 08-19-2022
We'll know more about our prospects for this season after Week 2. Until then, I'll avoid speculating. With so many guys on a roster,
plus players leaving for the pros/transfer portal, there is a certain variability associated with a college football roster (whether
that variability translates into W-L sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't in either direction).
I think one of the more underrated things that I will be looking for is whether the culture is better this year. I know it is not X's and O's,
but if the culture around the program is better this year, I think we will be better (maybe a low-mid tier bowl). If not, it will probably
be another long season.
(08-19-2022, 02:12 PM)msqueri Wrote: Yeah, the more I dug into that Cal game the more it appeared to be a genuine contender for both our worst defensive game ever and our worst game ever, period, at least in terms of how much we were dominated on the average play. A few of the thoughts I wrote the morning after:
2. After the Utah game, I pointed out that the yard per play differential (5.4) was not only the worst I was able to find in our history but 23 percent worse than the next worst (4.4 against Notre Dame in 2003). Last night the team was significantly more dominated than even that, a whopping 6.1 yard per differential. This is what I mean when I say possibly the two worst games in Stanford history. I don't know if I can emphasize enough how astounding a 6.1 yard per play differential is. A lot of folks watched Ohio State's 56-7 annihilation of Michigan State yesterday, right? 3.8 yard differential. When Stanford beat Rice 62-7 in Australia that was a 5.1 yard differential. You can't belong on a football field less than Stanford last night. AND THAT WAS AGAINST A FOUR WIN TEAM!
3. The biggest story is the incredible incompetence of the Stanford defense against an offense that came into the game with the #105 scoring offense in the nation. We gave up 10.1 yards per play allowed. Let me say that again: an average of a first down per play. 636 yards is the eighth most we've ever given up in a game (1981 Arizona State, 1999 Washington, 1998 Oregon, 2003 Oregon State, 2005 Notre Dame, 1982 UCLA, 1973 UCLA) but (as coaches of yesteryear didn't intentionally suck the energy out of the game and guarantee there would be so few plays by either team) I suspect it may be the case we've never given up so many yards on so few plays. The all-time worst performances for which stats are available weren't even close: the 1999 Washington game had 7.8 yards per play allowed, 2003 Oregon State was 7.4, and 2005 Notre Dame was 7.5. Hard to put into words how historic a first down allowed per play is. 41 points is a lot to give up too but it could have been much, much worse. The Wade-Perry forced fumble was an awesome, momentum-reversing individual play in which everybody else's failures and how many home runs Cal hit subsequently would have made that another likely Cal house call were it not for that play (and even if he made the tackle a touchdown drive would have of course been likely). And then McGill's interception in the end zone also took points off the board. Those are two of the biggest plays of the season for the Stanford defense and we still gave up 41 points. I just need to say again this was against Cal.
I know Cal is the big rival, but the Utah game was worse. What was sad about the Utah game was the effort on D (among many issues that night).
RE: Two weeks before the 2022 season and. . . . - newguy - 08-19-2022
(08-19-2022, 06:12 PM)d4cohn Wrote: What was sad about the Utah game was the effort on D (among many issues that night).
in particular, what struck me was the way that our defensive line literally got pushed around. part of that had to with Newton's laws, which is one reason why we should at least think about turning around offensive linemen.