David Shaw won't discuss, but we will...

David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - 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: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... (/thread-16520.html)

Pages: 1 2

David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - OutsiderFan - 09-29-2018

So #3 Clemson is losing at home to unranked (but 4-0) Syracuse as a - what I thought was an absurd 25 pt - home favorite.

Trevor Lawrence is out with an apparent concussion (Dabo's worst nightmare after losing Bryant this week), but Syracuse isn't beating them because he's out. They haven't had a possession with the backup yet and they are down 16-7.

This has pretty big playoff implications for Stanford and Notre Dame if Clemson goes down. A Stanford win over Notre Dame is de-facto a win for the Pac-12 over the ACC given how many ACC teams they play. Stanford could move up as high as #3/#4 today with a win in South Bend.

There is no way to underestimate how big this opportunity is for Stanford tonight, even if Clemson comes back to win. Of course, nobody is beating Alabama, but just getting into the playoff would be great.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - gocard14 - 09-29-2018

Clemson going down would be brobdingnagian for the Pac-12 playoff hopes, as the ACC is extremely weak at the top already, and a 1-loss Clemson would have a very weak resume for a playoff spot. We are rooting for anything that would keep the ACC or Big12 out of the playoff, and anything that will keep the SEC from getting a second team (meaning we want Georgia to lose and likely Alabama to steamroll everyone else).

Agreed that Alabama just looks absolutely terrifying this year. Most years they are ridiculously good but you can point out a flaw that can be exploited. Now they have an elite QB and offense to go with their defense. Uh-oh.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - OutsiderFan - 09-29-2018

Clemson got a pick and a FG to get within 3. They then forced a punt and Clemson had momentum down 16-13. Nothing takes that momentum away more than muffing a punt inside your own 10, like they did on the last play of the 3rd quarter, however!

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - cardcrimson - 09-29-2018

Syracuse plus 10 after a muffed punt and short drive for a TD.

Yes, Alabama looks very tough. Then again, they've played nobody that's good. TAMU is only mediocre this year, and that's the best opponent thus far.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - OutsiderFan - 09-29-2018

Congrats to Clemson for coming back and beating Syracuse. Gutty effort to play with your 3rd string QB and overcome 10 pt 4th Q deficit. Syracuse D was gassed because Clemson's D stepped up so well to shut down the Syracuse offense in second half.

Hope to see some more great games today!

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - qwerty49 - 09-29-2018

Syracuse had the game in its hands and blew it with an Oregon-like series of mistakes. Up 3 and facing 4th and 1, they faked a plunge and executed a jump pass to the tight end for what looked to be about a 12 yd gain that probably would have iced the game. But the LT was caught about 7-8 yds downfield and instead they had to punt.

Also with about 6:40 left they stopped Clemson but ran no clock at all and ended up punting after having used all of 20-30 seconds. Gave Clemson about 2 extra minutes right there.

BTW Bryant is technically still enrolled at Clemson, so it’s possible he can decide to stay and play. IMO this 4-game redshirt rule is already creating bad situations.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - martyup - 09-29-2018

(09-29-2018, 02:44 PM)qwerty49 Wrote: IMO this 4-game redshirt rule is already creating bad situations.

Think about this. A school that has five QBs on its roster could play the 3 best QBs for 4 games each and redshirt all 3. The other two QBs on the roster could be backups.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - Snorlax94 - 09-29-2018

I wonder what the woofing gods thought of this thread, just hours before kickoff...

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - OutsiderFan - 09-30-2018

(09-29-2018, 08:57 PM)Snorlax94 Wrote: I wonder what the woofing gods thought of this thread, just hours before kickoff...

Please. Stanford got its ass kicked up and down the field and was lucky it was only 38-17. The fact remains that game was a giant opportunity for the Pac-12, and Stanford failed miserably.

Washington loses to Auburn
USC got crushed at Texas
Stanford got hammered at Notre Dame.

Yes, they were all road games, but still, the Pac-12 has demonstrated it has no team worthy of the best in the SEC, Big 12, Big Ten, ACC, AND Notre Dame. Just a shameful and embarrassing place for the Pac-12 to be.

Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State, Penn State, Oklahoma, Clemson, Notre Dame, and probably LSU and Auburn, possibly West Virginia, are all probably better than any Pac-12 team. No Pac-12 team even Top-10 worthy.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - JPR36 - 09-30-2018

(09-30-2018, 06:31 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:
(09-29-2018, 08:57 PM)Snorlax94 Wrote: I wonder what the woofing gods thought of this thread, just hours before kickoff...

Please. Stanford got its ass kicked up and down the field and was lucky it was only 38-17. The fact remains that game was a giant opportunity for the Pac-12, and Stanford failed miserably.

Washington loses to Auburn
USC got crushed at Texas
Stanford got hammered at Notre Dame.

Yes, they were all road games, but still, the Pac-12 has demonstrated it has no team worthy of the best in the SEC, Big 12, Big Ten, ACC, AND Notre Dame. Just a shameful and embarrassing place for the Pac-12 to be.

Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State, Penn State, Oklahoma, Clemson, Notre Dame, and probably LSU and Auburn, possibly West Virginia, are all probably better than any Pac-12 team. No Pac-12 team even Top-10 worthy.

While I was hopeful, I sure didn't think we had looked like a top ten team in our first four games, even though we were ranked there.
Last night's game unfortunately confirmed we weren't one.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - Austroturf - 09-30-2018

(09-30-2018, 07:04 AM)JPR36 Wrote:
(09-30-2018, 06:31 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:
(09-29-2018, 08:57 PM)Snorlax94 Wrote: I wonder what the woofing gods thought of this thread, just hours before kickoff...

Please. Stanford got its ass kicked up and down the field and was lucky it was only 38-17. The fact remains that game was a giant opportunity for the Pac-12, and Stanford failed miserably.

Washington loses to Auburn
USC got crushed at Texas
Stanford got hammered at Notre Dame.

Yes, they were all road games, but still, the Pac-12 has demonstrated it has no team worthy of the best in the SEC, Big 12, Big Ten, ACC, AND Notre Dame. Just a shameful and embarrassing place for the Pac-12 to be.

Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State, Penn State, Oklahoma, Clemson, Notre Dame, and probably LSU and Auburn, possibly West Virginia, are all probably better than any Pac-12 team. No Pac-12 team even Top-10 worthy.

While I was hopeful, I sure didn't think we had looked like a top ten team in our first four games, even though we were ranked there.
Last night's game unfortunately confirmed we weren't one.

Correct. I see Stanford anywhere from 15-25 this year; and that's only if the O-line gets its act together and Bryce Love can shake off this injury and be healthy for the rest of the season. Washington might be top ten: they battled Auburn to the wire down in their part of the world, so that counts for something. But, yes, the Pac-12 really does not have a powerhouse (for the second year running).

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - OutsiderFan - 09-30-2018

Sure Stanford beat Oregon, but Herbert is so far and away the superior QB in the conference, that it's hard to see anyone else beating them from here on out. Won't be enough to make the playoff, but I now believe they will win the North this season.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - JPR36 - 09-30-2018

(09-30-2018, 08:14 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Sure Stanford beat Oregon, but Herbert is so far and away the superior QB in the conference, that it's hard to see anyone else beating them from here on out. Won't be enough to make the playoff, but I now believe they will win the North this season.

I could easily see Washington beating them. The Ducks will probably be favored since the game is in Eugene, but a few breaks go Washington's way (like they did for us) and I could see Washington winning.
Actually I hope the Ducks do win, because if we lose to Washington in Seattle, as I think we will, we can still go to the CCG if we win all the others and Washington loses another conference game.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - winflop - 09-30-2018

(09-30-2018, 08:29 AM)JPR36 Wrote:
(09-30-2018, 08:14 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Sure Stanford beat Oregon, but Herbert is so far and away the superior QB in the conference, that it's hard to see anyone else beating them from here on out. Won't be enough to make the playoff, but I now believe they will win the North this season.

I could easily see Washington beating them. The Ducks will probably be favored since the game is in Eugene, but a few breaks go Washington's way (like they did for us) and I could see Washington winning.
Actually I hope the Ducks do win, because if we lose to Washington in Seattle, as I think we will, we can still go to the CCG if we win all the others and Washington loses another conference game.

I love the optimism but if this team and especially offensive coaching staff don't get their heads out of their rear ends they will be lucky to be in the Amazing Chicken Bowl. They were damn lucky to win last week and completely fell apart in the second half last night.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - JPR36 - 09-30-2018

(09-30-2018, 08:54 AM)winflop Wrote:
(09-30-2018, 08:29 AM)JPR36 Wrote:
(09-30-2018, 08:14 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Sure Stanford beat Oregon, but Herbert is so far and away the superior QB in the conference, that it's hard to see anyone else beating them from here on out. Won't be enough to make the playoff, but I now believe they will win the North this season.

I could easily see Washington beating them. The Ducks will probably be favored since the game is in Eugene, but a few breaks go Washington's way (like they did for us) and I could see Washington winning.
Actually I hope the Ducks do win, because if we lose to Washington in Seattle, as I think we will, we can still go to the CCG if we win all the others and Washington loses another conference game.

I love the optimism but if this team and especially offensive coaching staff don't get their heads out of their rear ends they will be lucky to be in the Amazing Chicken Bowl. They were damn lucky to win last week and completely fell apart in the second half last night.

True, but I think the point is we played two of the top three or four teams on our schedule on the road. So let's not overreact.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - Goose - 09-30-2018

(09-30-2018, 08:54 AM)winflop Wrote: I love the optimism but if this team and especially offensive coaching staff don't get their heads out of their rear ends they will be lucky to be in the Amazing Chicken Bowl. They were damn lucky to win last week and completely fell apart in the second half last night.

I really can't agree that the coaching staff had much to do with us getting beat by ND. The simple fact is that we lost the battle of our OL vs their DL very very badly. End of story. If the OL had played better, then we could talk about poor play calling or bad strategy being the issues that cost us the (much closer) game. As it was, it didn't matter what was called. if the ND defense is in our backfield all night (or all the second half anyway), we are toast.
That will be true with Utah as well. If we can't block them, we will lose. If we can sort of hold our own, then we can talk about play calling. We probably won't have Love, so we will have to do something to generate a run game.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - JPR36 - 09-30-2018

(09-30-2018, 12:04 PM)Goose Wrote:
(09-30-2018, 08:54 AM)winflop Wrote: I love the optimism but if this team and especially offensive coaching staff don't get their heads out of their rear ends they will be lucky to be in the Amazing Chicken Bowl. They were damn lucky to win last week and completely fell apart in the second half last night.
I really can't agree that the coaching staff had much to do with us getting beat by ND. The simple fact is that we lost the battle of our OL vs their DL very very badly. End of story. If the OL had played better, then we could talk about poor play calling or bad strategy being the issues that cost us the (much closer) game. As it was, it didn't matter what was called. if the ND defense is in our backfield all night (or all the second half anyway), we are toast.
That will be true with Utah as well. If we can't block them, we will lose. If we can sort of hold our own, then we can talk about play calling. We probably won't have Love, so we will have to do something to generate a run game.

If we beat the Utes, it will be through the air. I hope we can generate enough a run game to at least keep their defense honest.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - OutsiderFan - 10-01-2018

Many people will disagree, but is it possible Shaw saying playoff talk is ridiculous, could deflate some confidence on the team? And is it possible they didn't go as "all in" on the Notre Dame game given the goal is first and foremost to win the Pac-12 North these days?

Of course the ass kicking in the trenches was comprehensive, particularly in the second half, but sometimes one team just doesn't want it as badly as the other or can think "here we go, this isn't our night, and this game isn't THAT important to us anyway." I'm just looking for some glimmer of hope that maybe Stanford isn't as soft as the game in South Bend indicated. I mean the Patriots got smoked by the Jags a couple weeks ago, and they blew out the 3-0 Dolphins yesterday.

On another note, I always feel like when Stanford plays at Notre Dame the game is bigger for them than Stanford, and alway feel it's bigger for Stanford when on the farm. Perhaps that's because ND needs a good win and Stanford is that in the last decade and Stanford has had a Voldemort candidate in 3 of the last 4 games at Stanford, and big performances against ND always help that cause.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - Snorlax94 - 10-01-2018

I think the team is professional in their maturity and the athletes are extraordinarily self-motivated young men.

So I don’t think they felt deflated by their coach or were overlooking a top 10 opponent.

I think they were probably physically and emotionally exhausted by the Oregon game, I think they had a short week to recover and prepare due to consecutive road games against ranked opponents, the second being across the country, I think they are banged up, and there is something wrong with the line. Also, as Shaw admitted, I think they made some play-calling mistakes on that last drive of the first half.

RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - OutsiderFan - 10-01-2018

(10-01-2018, 12:22 PM)Snorlax94 Wrote: I think they made some play-calling mistakes on that last drive of the first half.

Can you elaborate? I thought it was odd for them to be going into hurry up mode with 2 mins left when at midfield. They acted like they had a sense of urgency that they didn't really have, that would ensure ND got the ball back with plenty of time to score if they didn't get the next first down. This is exactly what happened.

If Stanford scored on the final drive of the half, or at least doesn't let ND score, does that change anything in terms of the W-L outcome? Probably not, but it likely is one that would make Stanford look less flattened.