The CardBoard
Stanford broke SC - 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: Stanford broke SC (/thread-12677.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Re: Stanford broke SC - ChicagoCard - 09-21-2016

(09-21-2016, 08:48 AM)Yvonne link Wrote:Chicago Visitor, I get a 403 error when I try to view those images. Could you just post the tweet?

Thank you for asking, yes. Really sorry about getting this wrong, but it's weird that they are displaying for me. Here's the Scott Wolf tweet about the missing players on the PAT, and the other screen picture that I thought was funny (i.e. the S,C, reporter's hat):

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxtzMBSfUmMDUGtvc3hpRTdHZjg/view

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxtzMBSfUmMDV0JIUGV3TmtZUzg/view

[tweet]778410868643999744[/tweet]
and then somebody tweeted: So they won't be getting paid for the game?


Re: Stanford broke SC - FarmBoy - 09-21-2016

Is it this tweet (I'm guessing not as the first response isn't "funny) https://twitter.com/InsideUSC/status/778439806279835648?lang=en

Or perhaps this one: https://twitter.com/InsideUSC/status/778412902730596355?lang=en

Or this: https://twitter.com/InsideUSC/status/778269880470601728?lang=en

Re: Stanford broke SC - stupac2 - 09-21-2016

(09-21-2016, 08:52 AM)ChicagoVisitor link Wrote:[quote author=Yvonne link=topic=15717.msg172186#msg172186 date=1474472912]
Chicago Visitor, I get a 403 error when I try to view those images. Could you just post the tweet?

Thank you for asking, yes. Really sorry about getting this wrong, but it's weird that they are displaying for me. Here's the Scott Wolf tweet about the missing players on the PAT, and the other screen picture that I thought was funny (i.e. the S,C, reporter's hat):

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxtzMBSfUmMDUGtvc3hpRTdHZjg/view

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxtzMBSfUmMDV0JIUGV3TmtZUzg/view
[/quote]

Google drive is a very bad option for sharing images. I use http://imgur.com, though I've been liking it somewhat less lately as they've tried to reddit-ize it and ruined what used to be the best image host online.

Re: Stanford broke SC - ChicagoCard - 09-21-2016

Yeah, I had tried this site for temporary sharing, http://www.tiikoni.com/tis/, but it links to the photo embedded on their site and won't work with this site's inline image sharing...

Re: Stanford broke SC - FarmBoy - 09-21-2016

I was amused at J Wilner's weekly Power Rankings when I read this description of SC's loss to 'Bama

Quote:"Never good when your flagship football program gets embarrassed with the college football world watching."

I used to go along with that mentality--as 'SC goes, so goes the conference's national reputation--but after years of the Pac12 north dominating the conference and 'SC having not won the league for 7 years, how long can 'SC ride its historical dominance plus the Pete Carrol years to be considered our "flag ship" team? If 'SC had the potential that Wilner believes it has, why haven't they been able to attract and retain a top flight coach?

I'm sure that IF (big IF) they figure it out and pull it together, they can have a strong program again, but I think it highly unlikely they'll be able to get back to the dominance they once had, particularly with parity in the P12.

Stanford and Oregon seem to be doing a pretty good job of repping the league without a strong 'SC.

Re: Stanford broke SC - BostonCard - 09-21-2016

OK, I'll say it.  Right now, Stanford is the Pac-12's flagship program.

BC

Re: Stanford broke SC - CornFed - 09-21-2016

Well, I agree, but haven't we hereby put the Woofing Gods on high alert?

Re: Stanford broke SC - BostonCard - 09-21-2016

(09-21-2016, 11:58 AM)CornFed link Wrote:Well, I agree, but haven't we hereby put the Woofing Gods on high alert?

Yeah, I thought of that, which is why I wrote, "okay I'll say it" because you know multiple people were thinking it.

If we want a non-Stanford way of saying it, USC has not been a flagship program since Oregon took the mantle from it a few years.

BC

Re: Stanford broke SC - CompSci87 - 09-21-2016

(09-21-2016, 09:36 AM)Boston Card link Wrote:OK, I'll say it.  Right now, Stanford is the Pac-12's flagship program.

Does this make Shaw the admiral?

Re: Stanford broke SC - jacketree - 09-21-2016

Not just Admiral; Fleet Admiral.

[Image: 2000px-US_Navy_O11_insignia.svg.png]


How would we tie P5 conferences to the Six Active Fleets?  Shaw is definitely in charge of the Third Fleet (Pacific).

[Image: 350px-USN_Fleets_%282009%29.png]

Re: Stanford broke SC - DC 86 - 09-21-2016

(09-21-2016, 09:36 AM)Boston Card link Wrote:OK, I'll say it.  Right now, Stanford is the Pac-12's flagship program.

BC

Absolutely, and you are right to say it.

Setting aside the obvious objective facts as to why Stanford is currently the Pac-12's flagship program, I believe that the subjective perception nationally has caught up as well.

When USC was on its remarkable winning streak there was an aura around the program - Pete Carroll's charisma, the celebrities at practice, etc.

When Oregon was dominating the conference there was an aura around Chip Kelly's innovative offense, the flashy uniforms, etc.

Now we are seeing Stanford constantly featured in national publications and segments. Luck and McCaffrey are household names for football fans. David Shaw works as an analyst on NFL Network and is constantly linked to NFL and elite college jobs. High profile recruits nationally are tweeting our catchy slogans such as "Fear The Tree", "Nerd Nation" and "Intellectual Brutality". It is intangible but it very much seems as if Stanford is the school that the rest of country thinks of first right now when west coast football comes to mind.

Re: Stanford broke SC - CornFed - 09-21-2016

(09-21-2016, 01:09 PM)DC 86 link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=15717.msg172193#msg172193 date=1474475760]
OK, I'll say it.  Right now, Stanford is the Pac-12's flagship program.

BC

Absolutely, and you are right to say it.

Setting aside the obvious objective facts as to why Stanford is currently the Pac-12's flagship program, I believe that the subjective perception nationally has caught up as well.

When Under Stanford Control (again) was on its remarkable winning streak there was an aura around the program - Pete Carroll's charisma, the celebrities at practice, etc.

When Oregon was dominating the conference there was an aura around Chip Kelly's innovative offense, the flashy uniforms, etc.

Now we are seeing Stanford constantly featured in national publications and segments. Luck and McCaffrey are household names for football fans. David Shaw works as an analyst on NFL Network and is constantly linked to NFL and elite college jobs. High profile recruits nationally are tweeting our catchy slogans such as "Fear The Tree", "Nerd Nation" and "Intellectual Brutality". It is intangible but it very much seems as if Stanford is the school that the rest of country thinks of first right now when west coast football comes to mind.
[/quote]

Yes, I believe these descriptions are all spot on.  All I can say, as a fan since 1970, is:  WOW!!!

Re: Stanford broke SC - CTcard - 09-21-2016

(09-21-2016, 01:09 PM)DC 86 link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=15717.msg172193#msg172193 date=1474475760]
OK, I'll say it.  Right now, Stanford is the Pac-12's flagship program.

Absolutely, and you are right to say it.

Setting aside the obvious objective facts as to why Stanford is currently the Pac-12's flagship program, I believe that the subjective perception nationally has caught up as well.
[/quote]

I guess it depends what you mean.

I listen to a lot of satellite radio on my long commute these days. On the college football station, Stanford gets generically glowing references, but isn't discussed all that much. Most all of their Stanford-$C game recap was "what's wrong with $C?".

The reason for this isn't strange, it's number of fans. Stanford has fewer than most top 10 programs, top 25 for that matter.

IN the Pac 12, $C has the most fans it would seem. They certainly have the largest attendance by a considerable margin - which if they were actually good again would presumably go up a fair amount.

Here are the Pac 12 2015 attendance averages, home games.
U$C  75,358
UCLA 66,858.
UW    61,919
ASU  57,712
UO    57,631
UA    51,393
Stan  49,917
Cal      48,800
Utah  46,533
Colo  39,389
OSU  36,079
WSU  29,407

Personally, I am 100% okay with that, but it does affect media coverage.

Re: Stanford broke SC - DC 86 - 09-21-2016

I don't think average home attendance is a perfect proxy for national popularity. Notre Dame ranks 15th in average home attendance (and was much further down before they expanded their stadium) but I'm fairly sure they are the most popular college team on a national level. And some teams have tremendous local support but little national footprint.

However I agree that Stanford lags towards the bottom in popularity, given that its alumni base is much smaller than other top teams.

My argument is that perception trails reality by a few years, and that even as Stanford ascended over the last decade the casual fan's (or media member's) view of Stanford was still "great academic school that can't compete with the big boys." I believe that today the same fan/pundit/bettor/recruit would answer "Stanford" if they were asked which team is the top team in the west. I'm not arguing that Stanford is the most popular program or that it receives the most coverage, but it receives the most complimentary coverage at the moment. The national narrative has evolved from "overachieving team, surprisingly competitive" to "top team and program", i.e. currently the flagship for the conference and region, as BC asserted.

Re: Stanford broke SC - dabigv13 - 09-21-2016

(09-21-2016, 09:02 AM)FarmBoy link Wrote:Stanford and Oregon seem to be doing a pretty good job of repping the league without a strong 'SC.

I agree, but it is worth pointing out that SC has the last Pac10/12 NC, what over a decade ago? And historically the most in the conference. I'll be happy if they never get another one, mind you....

Re: Stanford broke SC - winflop - 09-21-2016

(09-21-2016, 06:31 PM)dabigv link Wrote:[quote author=FarmBoy link=topic=15717.msg172192#msg172192 date=1474473777]
Stanford and Oregon seem to be doing a pretty good job of repping the league without a strong 'SC.

I agree, but it is worth pointing out that SC has the last Pac10/12 NC, what over a decade ago? And historically the most in the conference. I'll be happy if they never get another one, mind you....
[/quote]

You mean the one they vacated?

Re: Stanford broke SC - dabigv13 - 09-21-2016

I think it's pretty clear that in the pantheon of NCAA violations, the Reggie Bush stuff really doesn't rank that high. But fine, just take the year before it.

The bottom line is SC is the most historically successful Pac school. That's why we care more when we beat them. It probably does help the conference if SC is at least competent.

Re: Stanford broke SC - BostonCard - 09-21-2016

I can't believe I am defending USC, but even if you take out the vacated 2004 National CHampionship, they do have the most recent National Title, in 2003, though that one was split with LSU.  I think before that you have to go all the way back to 1991 and Don James' cheating Huskies.

** Ugh.  I'm just realizing the Pac-12 has not won many national titles in my lifetime.

BC

Re: Stanford broke SC - DC 86 - 09-21-2016

To be completely accurate, they were not selected for the 2003 BCS championship game, and their 2004 BCS championship game victory was vacated. However, they were AP national champions in both 2003 and 2004.

Not an SC fan, but I do consider them legitimate national champions in both years, in part because the vacated championship is relatively bogus, but more because the AP final vote holds more credibility for me than the BCS.

Re: Stanford broke SC - DC 86 - 09-21-2016

(09-21-2016, 09:21 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:I'm just realizing the Pac-12 has not won many national titles in my lifetime.

BC

SC is the only PCC/Pac-8/Pac-10/Pac-12 team (*) to ever be voted AP national champion (5x).

UCLA (1954) and Washington (1991) finished atop the coaches poll, but that's it for the conference.

The conference is obviously extremely strong overall but only a handful of football championships over 80 years, which is surprising.

(*) can't retroactively claim Colorado!