Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
BostonCard - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 08:59 PM)amartinsu13 link Wrote:Would it suck if Tucker is out though? He played horrible tonight. I'd rather see Hamilton in there at this point.
That is a horrible thing to say. I know what you mean, but that's no reason to cheer an injury on anyone.
BC
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
BostonCard - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 08:59 PM)amartinsu13 link Wrote:Would it suck if Tucker is out though? He played horrible tonight. I'd rather see Hamilton in there at this point.
That is a horrible thing to say. I know what you mean, but that's no reason to cheer an injury on anyone.
BC
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
ThePassionOfTheChryst - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 08:57 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=15827.msg174316#msg174316 date=1475293915]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=15827.msg174311#msg174311 date=1475293733]
[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=15827.msg174306#msg174306 date=1475293602]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=15827.msg174305#msg174305 date=1475293544]
2000 Rose Bowl after the fiasco in Texas comes to mind.
BC
Not to be a downer but that loss to Texas wasn't in-conference.
[/quote]
What does that have to do with the statement that "We've layed eggs and played in Rose Bowls before."Â If UW goes to the playoffs, then the fact that we lost in conference to them is irrelevant,
BC
[/quote]
It's not analogous. That loss to Texas had absolutely no bearing on our going to the Rose Bowl, whereas this loss will. If we hope to ring in the new year in Pasadena again we need UW to either run the table and get into the playoff, or drop two conference games.
[/quote]
I suppose this is a good time to issue a reminder that in 1999, we lost to UW as well. And we lost to SJSU. This is a stupid argument.
BC
[/quote]
My argument that UW needs to go undefeated or lose two conference games is stupid? Or my argument that a conference loss hurts more vis a vis Rose Bowl eligibility than a non-conference loss?
I agree that the season is far from over, I just don't understand how "we got smoked by Texas but still went to the RB in 2000" is relevant here, that's all.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
ThePassionOfTheChryst - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 08:57 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=15827.msg174316#msg174316 date=1475293915]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=15827.msg174311#msg174311 date=1475293733]
[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=15827.msg174306#msg174306 date=1475293602]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=15827.msg174305#msg174305 date=1475293544]
2000 Rose Bowl after the fiasco in Texas comes to mind.
BC
Not to be a downer but that loss to Texas wasn't in-conference.
[/quote]
What does that have to do with the statement that "We've layed eggs and played in Rose Bowls before."Â If UW goes to the playoffs, then the fact that we lost in conference to them is irrelevant,
BC
[/quote]
It's not analogous. That loss to Texas had absolutely no bearing on our going to the Rose Bowl, whereas this loss will. If we hope to ring in the new year in Pasadena again we need UW to either run the table and get into the playoff, or drop two conference games.
[/quote]
I suppose this is a good time to issue a reminder that in 1999, we lost to UW as well. And we lost to SJSU. This is a stupid argument.
BC
[/quote]
My argument that UW needs to go undefeated or lose two conference games is stupid? Or my argument that a conference loss hurts more vis a vis Rose Bowl eligibility than a non-conference loss?
I agree that the season is far from over, I just don't understand how "we got smoked by Texas but still went to the RB in 2000" is relevant here, that's all.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
thunder_chik - 09-30-2016
I will be interested in what Shaw has to say after the game. If he says we just have to "play better", I will puke.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
thunder_chik - 09-30-2016
I will be interested in what Shaw has to say after the game. If he says we just have to "play better", I will puke.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
stupac2 - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 08:58 PM)dabigv link Wrote:Look, if we play this way the rest of our games, we'll lose a lot more than we win.
But we're obviously a better team than we are showing tonight.
I bet UW drops two down the stretch. Oregon has beat em 12 in a row and it's at Autzen.
We have to improve in the trenches, clearly. But I think we'll turn this around.
If this is anything close to UW's true performance level, I really doubt they lose again. This is a team that looks like a real contender.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
stupac2 - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 08:58 PM)dabigv link Wrote:Look, if we play this way the rest of our games, we'll lose a lot more than we win.
But we're obviously a better team than we are showing tonight.
I bet UW drops two down the stretch. Oregon has beat em 12 in a row and it's at Autzen.
We have to improve in the trenches, clearly. But I think we'll turn this around.
If this is anything close to UW's true performance level, I really doubt they lose again. This is a team that looks like a real contender.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
OutsiderFan - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 09:02 PM)thunder_chik link Wrote:I will be interested in what Shaw has to say after the game. If he says we just have to "play better", I will puke.
I'm sure he will say we have to coach better too.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
OutsiderFan - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 09:02 PM)thunder_chik link Wrote:I will be interested in what Shaw has to say after the game. If he says we just have to "play better", I will puke.
I'm sure he will say we have to coach better too.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
amartinsu13 - 09-30-2016
I'm obviously not "cheering" any Cardinal hurt. I hope it's a minor injury and he's back next week. I'm just saying I'd rather see Hamilton in there, both tackles were exposed badly tonight.Â
My apologies if my comment came off that way. I didn't mean it that way.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
amartinsu13 - 09-30-2016
I'm obviously not "cheering" any Cardinal hurt. I hope it's a minor injury and he's back next week. I'm just saying I'd rather see Hamilton in there, both tackles were exposed badly tonight.Â
My apologies if my comment came off that way. I didn't mean it that way.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - BurgXXIII - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 09:02 PM)thunder_chik link Wrote:I will be interested in what Shaw has to say after the game. If he says we just have to "play better", I will puke.
Get a bucket ready.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - BurgXXIII - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 09:02 PM)thunder_chik link Wrote:I will be interested in what Shaw has to say after the game. If he says we just have to "play better", I will puke.
Get a bucket ready.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
82 Card - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 09:02 PM)thunder_chik link Wrote:I will be interested in what Shaw has to say after the game. If he says we just have to "play better", I will puke.
About the only thing he could say that would make me feel better is that the whole team has the flu.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
82 Card - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 09:02 PM)thunder_chik link Wrote:I will be interested in what Shaw has to say after the game. If he says we just have to "play better", I will puke.
About the only thing he could say that would make me feel better is that the whole team has the flu.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
stupac2 - 09-30-2016
Can't even slide so we can end this thing earlier. I want to go to bed.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread -
stupac2 - 09-30-2016
Can't even slide so we can end this thing earlier. I want to go to bed.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - BurgXXIII - 09-30-2016
Actually the worst thing about this game is that future opponents will now consider us beatable, unless and until we prove otherwise.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - BurgXXIII - 09-30-2016
Actually the worst thing about this game is that future opponents will now consider us beatable, unless and until we prove otherwise.