Stanford vs Pitt in the Sun Bowl (12/31) - 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 vs Pitt in the Sun Bowl (12/31) (/thread-16938.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: Stanford vs Pitt in the Sun Bowl (12/31) (/thread-16938.html)
RE: Stanford vs Pitt in the Sun Bowl (12/31) - terry - 12-03-2018
(12-03-2018, 05:52 PM)BostonCard Wrote: There is a not completely unbelievable situation where Costello goes pro, Mills medically retires . . .
Based on my brief conversation with Mills at the football banquet yesterday, I expect to see him on the field next year. Not sure about his availability for the Sun Bowl, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's ready.
RE: Stanford vs Pitt in the Sun Bowl (12/31) - d4cohn - 12-03-2018
(12-03-2018, 08:49 PM)JJJ Wrote: I guess I'll put this story here and we can keep following updates then... Although I don't (want to) see any of our students appearing here.
Quote:Back in 2016, it was a of immense proportions controversy when LSU running back Leonard Fournette and Stanford running back Christian McCaffrey, after declaring for the NFL draft, decided to skip their team’s bowl game.
At the time, both players were considered likely first-round draft choices (they both went in the top 10), and did not want to jeopardize their health with a of immense proportions payday coming around the corner. However, the decision was viewed by many as quitting on their teams. In the years since, this practice has gotten more popular among draft prospects and public opinion has massively swayed. Though some still don’t agree with it, most completely understand what is at stake for these unpaid athletes.
This year, we will keep an updated list of the players who decide not to play in their team’s bowl game.
http://www.yahoo.com/sports/college-football-players-sitting-bowl-games-2018-210123415.html
People may have differing views on players sitting out bowl games. My feeling is I would want players to first and foremost make decisions in the best interest of themselves and their families. If they want to play to have one final game with their brothers, then obviously as fans we should be glad. If, on other hand, they decide like Christian that it is in their best interest to focus on their NFL future, then my feeling is to wish them the best and be grateful as fans for their contributions to our team.
As such, if Kaden is unavailable/doesn't play, or JJAW wants to prepare for the draft, I am going to be glad that we had such a dominant TE/WR playing for our team these past 2-3 years. So if they appear on that list, it doesn't bother me.
Yes, I want us to win against Pitt, and I think we should win comfortably under most circumstances if we play anything close to our potential, but at the end of the day, the game is a post-season exhibition game.
RE: Stanford vs Pitt in the Sun Bowl (12/31) - terry - 12-03-2018
(12-03-2018, 10:10 PM)d4cohn Wrote: If JJAW wants to prepare for the draft, I am going to be glad that we had such a dominant WR playing for our team these past 2-3 years.
JJ's speech at the football banquet concluded with him saying something like this: "We have one more to play, against Pitt, and they don't know what's coming at them." That doesn't sound like a guy who's planning to skip the bowl game.
RE: Stanford vs Pitt in the Sun Bowl (12/31) - Phogge - 12-03-2018
My point is that if Shaw does offer and get ButterII then maybe there is no crisis in the near future. Tough nut the other night as De La Salle is loaded and playing like they will start a new streak. They play the evil Mater Dei this week for the Open title.
Looking forward to Liberty’s game in the D1 final.
RE: TreesAndBirds - d4cohn - 12-04-2018
(12-02-2018, 06:57 PM)needle Wrote: And UW definitely has a chance against an Ohio State team that's not going to be especially motivated.
Well, UW still has a chance, but about OSU not being especially motivated:
http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25449933/ohio-state-buckeyes-head-coach-urban-meyer-retire-coaching-rose-bowl
RE: TreesAndBirds - barrister7 - 12-04-2018
(12-04-2018, 09:27 AM)d4cohn Wrote:(12-02-2018, 06:57 PM)needle Wrote: And UW definitely has a chance against an Ohio State team that's not going to be especially motivated.
Well, UW still has a chance, but about OSU not being especially motivated:
http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25449933/ohio-state-buckeyes-head-coach-urban-meyer-retire-coaching-rose-bowl
The East certainly has a high opinion of Stanford's passing attack and overall prowess. The Washington Post's article re bowl games has the Sun Bowl included toward the bottom of it's list. The comments about the Sun Bowl are something to the effect of , "Pitt could not do worse than the 3-0 victory over Oregon State, could it? could it?". Stanford, of course, does not warrant mention in the article.
RE: Stanford vs Pitt in the Sun Bowl (12/31) - Snorlax94 - 12-07-2018
I was curious to learn more about Pitt so I watched what I could -- team highlights, and a collection of game highlights on ESPN. Trying to understand their record, their close game to Notre Dame, etc.
I can see why JJAW would want to play in that game so badly. I think Stanford scores a lot of points this game. It strikes me as the most fundamentally unsound defense Stanford will face this year. Out of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and Honorable Mention All-ACC Teams, no member of the Pitt front 7 was mentioned. Two people in the secondary were I think third team all ACC or Honorable Mention. ANd the matchup, oh!
The D Linemen look undersized, the linebackers look undersized and undistinguished. In the Clemson game, a big physical receiver went up for a jump ball in the end zone and snatched it with ease. Sound familiar? Game highlights show other teams with a powerful line getting a good push. Clemson highlights show how a RB with elite speed can break it outside and take it to the House over and over again.
Unless the team takes their foot off the gas or has way too conservative an offensive game plan, I expect to see Stanford score 49+ points this game.
What is most terrifying to me about Pitt is watching their run game. Among all the All-ACC teams, they have 2 running backs and **ALL 5** interior linemen recognized, and deservedly so. No team stops them from scoring 10-20ish. No matter what, it's hard to imagine Pitt not getting 130+ running yards -- I just hope it's not 300+. The run game is a beast on tape. They blow lines back, they have athletic linemen getting hands on people at the second level, their running backs wait for the blocks to open up, they get good creases, then they zigzag through defenses with patience, balance, power and speed for big gains. I don't think Stanford has played a run game game this good all year, and I can't think of something comparable in recent years. It looks familiar -- like a 2016 Stanford line with 2 Love-like running backs (with less breakaway speed) plus a 230-lb full back (and Stanford has shied from tackling big runners lately).
If Okereke and Barton are as healthy as they (miraculously) were able to stay for the Cal game, then I could see Stanford winning 49-24 if Pitt stays fairly one-dimensional and pays when they try to pass.
If Stanford's super-thin defense gets some injuries, depending on how ready those true frosh linebackers are, watch out -- with a couple of turnovers, I could see Pitt winning a defenseless shootout something like 42-38.
The second terrifying thing is thinking about Keller Chryst's injury at the Sun Bowl two years ago. Man, this last year has been so tough for injuries. Please, no more.
RE: Stanford vs Pitt in the Sun Bowl (12/31) - d4cohn - 12-07-2018
(12-07-2018, 09:47 PM)Snorlax94 Wrote: What is most terrifying to me about Pitt is watching their run game. Among all the All-ACC teams, they have 2 running backs and **ALL 5** interior linemen recognized, and deservedly so. No team stops them from scoring 10-20ish. No matter what, it's hard to imagine Pitt not getting 130+ running yards -- I just hope it's not 300+. The run game is a beast on tape. They blow lines back, they have athletic linemen getting hands on people at the second level, their running backs wait for the blocks to open up, they get good creases, then they zigzag through defenses with patience, balance, power and speed for big gains. I don't think Stanford has played a run game game this good all year, and I can't think of something comparable in recent years. It looks familiar -- like a 2016 Stanford line with 2 Love-like running backs (with less breakaway speed) plus a 230-lb full back (and Stanford has shied from tackling big runners lately).
Oregon (when their line was healthy, which was when we faced them) doesn't fit that mold? Pitt ran for 250 yards against Penn State, and still lost 51-6, because their QB threw for 55 yards, 0 TD's and 1 INT's against a relatively mediocre defense. Pitt's QB threw for 8 yards (on 4-of-16 passing) against Clemson. They may not run a triple option, but this team on a normal day (when their QB isn't delivering an above average performance) is basically a triple option team in terms of run-pass balance.
This feels like a repeat of Big Game, except Pitt's defense is significantly worse than Cal's.