The CardBoard
UCD Game Thread - 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: UCD Game Thread (/thread-16417.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

RE: UCD Game Thread - Spiny_Norman - 09-15-2018

Stanford had only 2 first downs the entire 2nd half - the pass to St Brown and the long run by Speights.

RE: UCD Game Thread - Austroturf - 09-15-2018

Giving up a TD on the last play: how unnecessary.  Somehow, this whole game was minimalistic, as if Shaw did not want to beat them too badly.  30-10 is respectable, but not close.  The Aggies will be back for more.

RE: UCD Game Thread - BostonCard - 09-15-2018

(09-15-2018, 02:33 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:  Stanford had only 2 first downs the entire 2nd half - the pass to St Brown and the long run by Speights.

We played the entire fourth quarter with our second, third, and fourth string QB's, and our third, fourth, and fifth string running backs.

BC

RE: UCD Game Thread - Austroturf - 09-15-2018

Meanwhile, Oregon leads SJSU 14-0 in the first quarter.

RE: UCD Game Thread - OutsiderFan - 09-15-2018

There is absolutely zero reason to play a game like this. It accomplishes pretty much nothing to advance either team's cause, it's boring AF, a  colossal rip-off for fans, and there is only injury downside for both squads.  

It's worse than pre-season NFL, and that is horrid.

RE: UCD Game Thread - JPR36 - 09-15-2018

(09-15-2018, 02:41 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  There is absolutely zero reason to play a game like this. It accomplishes pretty much nothing to advance either team's cause, it's boring AF, a  colossal rip-off for fans, and there is only injury downside for both squads.  

It's worse than pre-season NFL, and that is horrid.

Well, what it's supposed to do is give the team a break between big games (like U$C and Oregon). Whether it actually did that or not is questionable.

RE: UCD Game Thread - Austroturf - 09-15-2018

(09-15-2018, 02:45 PM)JPR36 Wrote:  
(09-15-2018, 02:41 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  There is absolutely zero reason to play a game like this. It accomplishes pretty much nothing to advance either team's cause, it's boring AF, a  colossal rip-off for fans, and there is only injury downside for both squads.  

It's worse than pre-season NFL, and that is horrid.

Well, what it's supposed to do is give the team a break between big games (like U$C and Oregon). Whether it actually did that or not is questionable.

Good point.  If Stanford had led 30-3 at the half, then the "break" would have been real.  Grinding out a dominant victory over four quarters is not a break.  It's business as usual.

RE: UCD Game Thread - JPR36 - 09-15-2018

(09-15-2018, 02:40 PM)Austroturf Wrote:  Meanwhile, Oregon leads SJSU 14-0 in the first quarter.

Does that surprise anyone? The Ducks will win in a blowout. That doesn't mean, however, we can't beat them next week.

RE: UCD Game Thread - JJJ - 09-15-2018

(09-15-2018, 02:37 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  
(09-15-2018, 02:33 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:  Stanford had only 2 first downs the entire 2nd half - the pass to St Brown and the long run by Speights.

We played the entire fourth quarter with our second, third, and fourth string QB's, and our third, fourth, and fifth string running backs.

BC

Wouldn’t we have had more except for all the flags? Can’t really blame’em at that point in the game, with the players that were in. I say well done overall.

RE: UCD Game Thread - Austroturf - 09-15-2018

(09-15-2018, 02:50 PM)JPR36 Wrote:  
(09-15-2018, 02:40 PM)Austroturf Wrote:  Meanwhile, Oregon leads SJSU 14-0 in the first quarter.

Does that surprise anyone? The Ducks will win in a blowout. That doesn't mean, however, we can't beat them next week.

Agree.  I think we will beat them.  But we will do it in a minimalistic way, as usual.

RE: UCD Game Thread - washingtonismoney - 09-15-2018

(09-15-2018, 02:51 PM)JJJ Wrote:  Wouldn’t we have had more except for all the flags? Can’t really blame’em at that point in the game, with the players that were in. I say well done overall.

I wouldn't go with "well done" overall -- seems a bit strong. The defense did well, of course. It's fair to say they've far outpaced expectations (mine, at least) through the first three games of the season. 

The offense was mediocre overall, just over 5.2 yards per play. Of course, it seemed like the players were having a case of the blues through the first few drives. It wasn't obvious to me there were strategic problems; instead, it just seemed like there were a number of errors, mostly uncharacteristic. Too early a game? On a emotional low because of the big game against SC? Just one of those games? Maybe all those things. In isolation I wouldn't necessarily be disturbed. Then again, the offense has had one solid game (against SDSU), one solid half (against SC), and one pretty blah game considering the quality of opposition (i.e. Davis). I'm a bit uneasy with the offense, viewing things in totality. 

Positives: Michael Wilson looks like a player; same for Trevor Speights; and Adebo.

RE: UCD Game Thread - Austroturf - 09-15-2018

Notre Dame hangs on against Vanderbilt (Derek Mason) 22-17 in South Bend.  That augurs well for our visit there in two weeks.

RE: UCD Game Thread - JPR36 - 09-15-2018

(09-15-2018, 02:58 PM)washingtonismoney Wrote:  
(09-15-2018, 02:51 PM)JJJ Wrote:  Wouldn’t we have had more except for all the flags? Can’t really blame’em at that point in the game, with the players that were in. I say well done overall.

I wouldn't go with "well done" overall -- seems a bit strong. The defense did well, of course. It's fair to say they've far outpaced expectations (mine, at least) through the first three games of the season. 

The offense was mediocre overall, just over 5.2 yards per play. Of course, it seemed like the players were having a case of the blues through the first few drives. It wasn't obvious to me there were strategic problems; instead, it just seemed like there were a number of errors, mostly uncharacteristic. Too early a game? On a emotional low because of the big game against SC? Just one of those games? Maybe all those things. In isolation I wouldn't necessarily be disturbed. Then again, the offense has had one solid game (against SDSU), one solid half (against SC), and one pretty blah game considering the quality of opposition (i.e. Davis). I'm a bit uneasy with the offense, viewing things in totality. 

Positives: Michael Wilson looks like a player; same for Trevor Speights; and Adebo.

Yeah, going into the season I think we all thought the offense looked excellent; the defense questionable. Based on the first three games, I would say the reverse is true. We'll see how we do against the Ducks in Eugene.

RE: UCD Game Thread - washingtonismoney - 09-15-2018

(09-15-2018, 03:06 PM)JPR36 Wrote:  Yeah, going into the season I think we all thought the offense looked excellent; the defense questionable. Based on the first three games, I would say the reverse is true. We'll see how we do against the Ducks in Eugene.

Because I'm a bit too optimistic in general, the offense reminds me of 2015 -- where it took a few games for everyone to harmonize, but then got good quick. All the players are talented. It's just not quite working yet.

RE: UCD Game Thread - SF_Cardinal_Fan - 09-15-2018

I enjoyed attending today's game. Great weather and no waiting on line , anywhere.
That said, I was stunned to see KJ play the way he did today. Every player can have an off day, but the amount of "off" he revealed really surprised me.

RE: UCD Game Thread - stupac2 - 09-15-2018

(09-15-2018, 03:08 PM)washingtonismoney Wrote:  
(09-15-2018, 03:06 PM)JPR36 Wrote:  Yeah, going into the season I think we all thought the offense looked excellent; the defense questionable. Based on the first three games, I would say the reverse is true. We'll see how we do against the Ducks in Eugene.

Because I'm a bit too optimistic in general, the offense reminds me of 2015 -- where it took a few games for everyone to harmonize, but then got good quick. All the players are talented. It's just not quite working yet.

The main problem seems to be that we can't run block at all, which is very concerning. If we get all the starters back for next week then we havea chance to turn things around, but man, it's been rough so far. Maybe we're missing Bloomgren?

RE: UCD Game Thread - washingtonismoney - 09-15-2018

(09-15-2018, 04:41 PM)stupac2 Wrote:  The main problem seems to be that we can't run block at all, which is very concerning. If we get all the starters back for next week then we havea chance to turn things around, but man, it's been rough so far. Maybe we're missing Bloomgren?

That didn't strike me as the problem today -- or at least maybe, but with an asterisk? Speights seemed to take advantage of holes; Scarlett, not. Of course there were a lot of holds, mostly on run plays, which mostly struck me as the errorful rather than desperate variety. 

The pass blocking was, in my opinion, the weaker element of the blocking game against Davis.

RE: UCD Game Thread - muiron - 09-15-2018

Not a great game, but 

a)  a W, and 
b)  no new injuries (as far as I can tell).

BTW I thought the rule was that if a conversion once the game was over couldn't affect the outcome, it wouldn't be taken. I remember a game (at WSU?) where we scored at TD on the last play and so didn't get to go for a conversion. I thought that was the rule - and if it isn't, it should be. Why risk an injury in a play that can't possibly matter?

Annoying ending - including showing 1 or 2 seconds after a long play where one of our rushers was clearly tackled - but I suspect the refs didn't call it because, hey, the game is over. Except that it wasn't. Of course, it could be because holding only gets called on us.

Speaking of which, HOLDING! Of course, it is only called when we have a good run. Is there a difference in holding calls from pro to college so that Callahan isn't great on it the college standards (yet)? Of course, some of the holding calls weren't on the O iline - receivers and running backs got some holdings today.

We NEED fewer penalties for Oregon. And Notre Dame. And Utah. Etc.

RE: UCD Game Thread - Cinemalover - 09-15-2018

(09-15-2018, 02:41 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  There is absolutely zero reason to play a game like this. It accomplishes pretty much nothing to advance either team's cause, it's boring AF, a  colossal rip-off for fans, and there is only injury downside for both squads.  

It's worse than pre-season NFL, and that is horrid.

I disagree. The Cardinal gets healthy between big games, rests banged up players, 2nd and 3rd string get PT. Esp QBs, can't replicate that in practice. Doss and Maier legit. Davis learned their D can step up for a big opponent, and Doss can deliver against a top 10 FBS team. If Maier played like his numbers last year (65% completion percentage), its a more serious game.

RE: UCD Game Thread - winflop - 09-15-2018

The good
- We won
- Tree-fense showed up again. UCD had 100 yards of total offense at halftime
- Jet Toner was perfect
- Got a lot of backups some PT
- No injuries (that I'm aware of)

The bad
- OL still looks lost
- First down yardage was simply awful. We average pretty much 0 yards on first down this year
- KJ looked like he just rolled out of bed in the first quarter. Got better, but still wasn't good
- Too many coverage sacks & flushes. With the number of weapons we have in the passing game, there are too many guys in single coverage for someone to not be open

Will need to play MUCH better next Saturday. Onward & upward we are 3-0 and likely going to be #7 in the next poll. This team has the talent to be a really special team. The next two weeks will do a lot to determine how special.