The CardBoard
Why Stanford Can Beat 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: Why Stanford Can Beat SC (/thread-22249.html)

Pages: 1 2

Why Stanford Can Beat SC - Snorlax94 - 09-10-2021

There's so much negativity around here, I wanted to add the perspective that I think Stanford really can beat SC tomorrow.

I don't think that's the likeliest outcome -- in 2019 SC roasted us 45-20, and the past few years, we have struggled to bring down QBs like Slovis, and he shuffles around great, and I fear he will carve us up again. And from the SJ State game, it looks like they have another wealth of big, fast, physical receivers.

But we all already know the negatives and seem fixated on them. I'm going to list the positives, leading to why I think there's a real solid chance -- let's say 40% -- that Stanford beats SC tomorrow.

#1) The number one reason is that this is a conference game. One trend I see in Shaw's coaching and preparation, is that he saves the most for Big Game, followed by Pac-12 North Games, then prepares for the Pac-12 South Games, and prepares the least for non-conference games. It's infuriating because Stanford keeps getting beat by non-conference opponents -- K State, UCF, SD State, Wake Forest, and it's in those games I hit the lowest lows wondering if Stanford has anything in its darn playbook. But then during the next conference game I see that Shaw did have a lot of new things up his sleeve, he just wouldn't reveal them, even if he's down by 3 and has the ball for the final drive against SD State. After losing to SD State by 3 in 2017, the next week Stanford put up 58 points blowing up UCLA.

#2) As far as I know, the team is healthier than in the last few years.

#3) While the physical mismatch between SC and SJ State almost looked comical,  I know Stanford has the physical attributes and the physicality to beat SC. You can't take SC's domination of S J State and assume anything like that will happen to Stanford. It will be a different game.

#4) I think people are a bit too down on the past few years of recruiting and on the athletic talent on this year's squad. Against K State, the team just looked like a mess. People missed their assignments. The line didn't get push. I even saw a blocker *flinch* and whiff instead of making contact on the defender. Say what you will about the Stanford football coaching staff, but by later in the season, the team usually executes a lot better. It's not like these guys don't know how to coach. So, there are no excuses for being so much less prepared than K State last week, but by historical standards, the team will get there, it's just the question of whether they will have gotten there by tomorrow.

#5) I think Stanford has been developing QBs in the post-Luck era. I think McKee has a great ceiling. I don't know how far along he is just yet, but the potential is there. *This* season.

#6) One positional positive -- probably the most frustrating aspect of Stanford's losses to SC in recent years has been the team's inability to bring down the SC quarterback. They move around, shrug off weak arm tackles, slide away from one piece of a pocket collapsing, and 6-8 seconds into a play they hit a receiver deep downfield, wide open. Stanford got 3 sacks last week. I'm not saying the party is back in the backfield, but I saw a glimmer of hope last week. If they can bring some heat and actually Sack the Slovis, there's a much better chance.

#7) And let's not forget how good this team was last year. I think it was a really good squad. I think were it not for the testing bull*hit at Oregon, the team had the potential to go 6-0. And most of that team is back. If these guys play better than they did those final 4 games last season -- a level they already achieved last fall -- it can be a really good squad, even with a new QB and center.

We know we have a the talent for a really good line. We know we have a bunch of big, fast receivers that can make spectacular catches. We know what Austin Jones can do at RB. And supposedly we have some good talent on this year's defense. We've been waiting years for the injured linebackers to rejoin the line-up. So I know they are capable of a lot, lot more.

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - martyup - 09-10-2021

I didn't see a team with a fire in their belly against KState.   Unless that changes . . .

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - dabigv13 - 09-10-2021

Great post. Early season, early start, away OOC games have been a Stanford bugaboo for YEARS. The K State loss was bad sure but we've come back and had a great seasons after similar debacles. I was in the stands for 24-23, this team has more talent than that one, just need to wake up! We have a pretty good record in night games at the Coliseum, I think this could be a good one too!

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - BostonCard - 09-10-2021

Three words: greatest upset ever

If they could do it, surely this team can.

BC

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - Hank 91 - 09-11-2021

I was wondering the same thing regarding the lack of urgency for this non-conference game. Here's what I wrote about it...

Quote:So if it's true that the Stanford quarterback needs a full week of practice to prepare for game day, it would seem that Shaw's decision to play both West and McKee left him without a prepared quarterback in the huddle. I don't want to believe that this might be true, but the questions must be asked: Was this game just a dress rehearsal for the games that count? Did Shaw make a calculation that a road game against Kansas State didn't really matter since his team has no designs on a national championship? Instead of putting his team in the best position to beat the Wildcats, did he instead use this game to gather a few final bits of data on McKee vs. West?
All of that seems preposterous, but there was another concerning moment deeper in the second half. The Cardinal finally produced a solid drive on its final possession of the game. McKee was at the controls for a ten-play drive that covered 75 yards in 3:54 and featured some of his best work. He completed 6 of 7 passes for 40 yards, including a nice 14-yard touchdown pass to Brycen Tremayne that cut the K-State lead to 24-6 with 3:16 left to play.
It would've been a long shot, but the shot was still there, and a two-point conversion would've kept the Cardinal within two scores. Watching from my couch, I knew the game was over, but when Shaw didn't go for two, he told us that he knew the game was over also. When the ball went through the uprights to make it 24-7, it was.


RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - OutsiderFan - 09-11-2021

(09-11-2021, 12:54 AM)Hank 91 Wrote:  I was wondering the same thing regarding the lack of urgency for this non-conference game. Here's what I wrote about it...

Quote:So if it's true that the Stanford quarterback needs a full week of practice to prepare for game day, it would seem that Shaw's decision to play both West and McKee left him without a prepared quarterback in the huddle. I don't want to believe that this might be true, but the questions must be asked: Was this game just a dress rehearsal for the games that count? Did Shaw make a calculation that a road game against Kansas State didn't really matter since his team has no designs on a national championship? Instead of putting his team in the best position to beat the Wildcats, did he instead use this game to gather a few final bits of data on McKee vs. West?
All of that seems preposterous, but there was another concerning moment deeper in the second half. The Cardinal finally produced a solid drive on its final possession of the game. McKee was at the controls for a ten-play drive that covered 75 yards in 3:54 and featured some of his best work. He completed 6 of 7 passes for 40 yards, including a nice 14-yard touchdown pass to Brycen Tremayne that cut the K-State lead to 24-6 with 3:16 left to play.
It would've been a long shot, but the shot was still there, and a two-point conversion would've kept the Cardinal within two scores. Watching from my couch, I knew the game was over, but when Shaw didn't go for two, he told us that he knew the game was over also. When the ball went through the uprights to make it 24-7, it was.

Based on what I saw of the KSU game - which wasn't everything - the OL is why Stanford lost. It was atrocious. I'm not sure I buy the "no QB was fully prepared" notion as a major factor in the loss. Maybe a fully prepared QB might have performed better, but even a fully prepared Trevor Lawrence with Clemson's skill players would have lost given how hapless the OL was.

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - gailtate - 09-11-2021

I would not bet on Stanford beating San Jose State tonight.

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - baycommuter - 09-11-2021

Yes, I was at the game and wasn't happy with going for one at 24-6. The only reason I can think of Shaw gave up was that we'd burned two timeouts and probably needed to recover two onside kicks to have any chance.

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - fullmetal - 09-11-2021

Let's be clear, the game wasn't lost on the decision to kick the XP.  It was lost in the thousand cuts of bad OL execution in the prior three-plus quarters.  It's not a secret: the OL needs explosiveness off the snap and needs to be able to push aside the front seven at the point of attack when running.  Engage the correctly assigned defender and pancake when passing.  Give the QB as many seconds to throw.  Don't false start twice in a row.  Toss fools around, as Ben Muth says.

Last week, we saw an OL that ran headlong into a stone wall of KSU defenders, and we also saw the same OL give up a fair bit of QB pressure (and QBs who couldn't handle game-speed decision-making under pressure).  

It's gonna be the same guys out there tonight.  Let's hope the results are...different.

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - CardinalSagehen - 09-11-2021

(09-11-2021, 09:32 AM)baycommuter Wrote:  Yes, I was at the game and wasn't happy with going for one at 24-6. The only reason I can think of Shaw gave up was that we'd burned two timeouts and probably needed to recover two onside kicks to have any chance.

It was a question of having to recover two onside kicks vs. having to recover three, so it still didn't make sense.  The only thing that might have made sense is total capitulation, i.e., not even trying the onside kick after the score.

I wondered if Shaw just didn't want to reveal our best 2-point conversion play in such a meaningless situation, but then why not just call another play?  

It's mostly symbolic.  We are probably making too much of Shaw's decisions down 24 points in the final two minutes.  I'd like to think he would have gotten it right if it had mattered.  But why even invite questions among fans and, more importantly, players?

Back to the original post - it’s slightly delusional, but not entirely. I’m all for it! It’s too soon to know a team’s potential after one game.

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - Goose - 09-11-2021

(09-11-2021, 09:53 AM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:  
(09-11-2021, 09:32 AM)baycommuter Wrote:  Yes, I was at the game and wasn't happy with going for one at 24-6. The only reason I can think of Shaw gave up was that we'd burned two timeouts and probably needed to recover two onside kicks to have any chance.

It was a question of having to recover two onside kicks vs. having to recover three, so it still didn't make sense.  The only thing that might have made sense is total capitulation, i.e., not even trying the onside kick after the score.

I wondered if Shaw just didn't want to reveal our best 2-point conversion play in such a meaningless situation, but then why not just call another play?  

It's mostly symbolic.  We are probably making too much of Shaw's decisions down 24 points in the final two minutes.  I'd like to think he would have gotten it right if it had mattered.  But why even invite questions among fans and, more importantly, players?

Back to the original post - it’s slightly delusional, but not entirely. I’m all for it! It’s too soon to know a team’s potential after one game.
 Is recovering 3 onside kicks,  scoring 2 more touchdowns kicking 3 extra points and making a field goal less probable than recovering 2 onside kicks, scoring 2 more touchdowns and converting 3 two point conversions? When you are dealing with vanishingly small probabilities, it may be very hard to evaluate. I submit that both numbers are so close to zero it is hard to argue one way or the other.

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - ADPinWDC - 09-11-2021

Like the thread..  
WILDCARD -- USC lays an egg.  
In 2009, 2011, and especially in 2015 -- we got up on them early and they wilted mentally.  
They didn't panic in 2019, and whacked us. 

But, USC is capable of making mistakes.  
They are more athletic, but not a disciplined team.
Sure they are a 17 point favorite, but in 2007 they were favored by 41 points. 

McKee is from SoCal -- he wants to light it up, and I think Shaw gives him the green light.  
Nothing to lose.

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - BigJohn043 - 09-11-2021

Our only real chance lies in the idea that this is the biggest game on our schedule and they don't really care.  That almost certainly isn't enough but it is our only real hope....
And FWIW, #7 above is a joke.  We were a bad football team last year that got lucky and squeezed out four close wins against other bad teams.  And we are less talented this year....

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - BostonCard - 09-11-2021

(09-11-2021, 01:12 PM)BigJohn043 Wrote:  Our only real chance lies in the idea that this is the biggest game on our schedule and they don't really care.  That almost certainly isn't enough but it is our only real hope....
And FWIW, #7 above is a joke.  We were a bad football team last year that got lucky and squeezed out four close wins against other bad teams.  And we are less talented this year....

Since I doubt you’d give the benefit of the doubt for a close loss against a good team, why don’t the close wins count?

BC

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - CompSci87 - 09-11-2021

If we'd gone for two, I'm sure people would have ridiculed that decision too. There was no earthly chance to win at that point, and the TD was just a consolation score to avoid a shutout.

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - BigJohn043 - 09-11-2021

(09-11-2021, 01:29 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  
(09-11-2021, 01:12 PM)BigJohn043 Wrote:  Our only real chance lies in the idea that this is the biggest game on our schedule and they don't really care.  That almost certainly isn't enough but it is our only real hope....
And FWIW, #7 above is a joke.  We were a bad football team last year that got lucky and squeezed out four close wins against other bad teams.  And we are less talented this year....

Since I doubt you’d give the benefit of the doubt for a close loss against a good team, why don’t the close wins count?

BC

Why do you doubt that?  If we had lost a close game to KSU I would have felt very different about it....

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - BostonCard - 09-11-2021

You must have this board confused with some other one.

BC

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - winflop - 09-11-2021

If those kinds of things happen against any opponent, Stanford is likely to win. I'm not counting on it, even though I'm rooting for it.

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - Sam Leopold - 09-11-2021

(09-11-2021, 07:06 AM)gailtate Wrote:  I would not bet on Stanford beating San Jose State tonight.

Point taken.  Luckily, we aren't playing them today......

RE: Why Stanford Can Beat SC - French Rage - 09-11-2021

Snorlax, got any lotto number suggestions?