This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woofing

This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woofing - 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: This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woofing (/thread-683.html)

This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woofing - Redrum - 11-04-2010

but if you follow that dictum-- of planning for success-- then this landmine is waiting to blow up our hopes for a Rose Bowl appearance.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-1104-dufresne-20101104,0,7555953.column?page=1

Two ironies here: Utah, not yet an official member of the Pac-12, could go to the Rose Bowl before Arizona which has been around for 32 years of so. And, of course, the fifty years Kal has waited for the miracle to occur.

Also note the very positive coverage Stanford has gotten from the LA Times. Better than the Chron, mostly.

But, as Dufresne noted. Gotta beat Arizona, then Arizona St., then Kal and then Oregon State for this to be of any concern to us. Â Here\'s to not laying an egg on Saturday.

Re: This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woo - george - 11-05-2010

I suppose on some level this is sacrilege, but the scenario laid out in this article might be the ideal one for Stanford. Here\'s how my logic goes:

From a pac 10 perspective we want Oregon playing a team from the SEC in the national championship game. As much as I feel like Boise State or TCU deserve to play in the game, it doesn\'t do anything for the pac-10\'s reputation to beat a non-AQ team. It only sets up the potential to lose thus proving how weak the pac 10 is. On the other hand, beating the SEC champ will finally end (or at least delay by one year) those infuriating "SEC SEC SEC" chants I\'ve been subjected to the last couple of years.

By the same token, we want the big 10 to have to shoulder the burden of facing an angry undefeated non-AQ team in a bowl. Even better if this team is Utah as they are joining the pac 10 next year.

Finally Stanford. The article does mention that if we end up #4 we could still be shut out of the rose bowl. But at #4 we\'re guaranteed a BCS bowl. Won\'t it help our recruiting to play a BCS bowl in the southeast?

As a fan it\'s fun to imagine these possibilities, but I trust that JH et al are thinking only about todays practices and tonight\'s meetings etc.

I really hope we get a full crowd on Saturday. It\'s really pretty embarrassing that it\'s #10 vs #13 in week 9 and we\'re nowhere near a sellout. Ratmandoo, are we going to drive up for the game to do our part?

Re: This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woo - unclechuck - 11-05-2010

george - I\'m in complete agreement with your rosy scenario; best outcome for us and the conference. However, I haven\'t stayed current on the latest tweaks of BCS game selection, especially the selection process for the at large teams. So, I\'ve been managing my hopes with a best case scenario of an Alamo match up with a one loss Big12 team.

Are you sure about a prospective #4 ranking insuring selection? My impression is that aside from this one year non-AQ rider for the Rose Bowl and the moot ND requirements the BCS bowl committees have a pretty free hand in selecting their at-large teams with travel attendance being the major determinant. Does ranking or number of losses confer specific selection status?

Can you clarify?

Re: This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woo - dabigv13 - 11-05-2010

If we could get up to #4, I agree with your scenario. Hard to see how that happens though, considering how the voters have already boned us by placing us behind so many other 1 loss teams.

I know that the #4 team being an automatic BCS qualifier rule was around in the past, but it seems like the rules change all the time in this shell game, so perhaps this year is different?

EDIT:

This is in fact still the case

http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819597

Re: This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woo - fullmetal - 11-05-2010

I think a #4 ranking does not ensure any BCS bowl selection. Â Money talks...very loudly :(

Re: This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woo - 97fan - 11-05-2010

Based on my reading of the insanely arcane BCS rules, I think George is right about the mechanics: if Stanford is ranked in the top 4 of the BCS, it will qualify for a BCS bowl.

The qualification rules are here:
http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bcs_explained.html

The way I read the rules is that the Pac-10, Big East, Big 12, Big Ten, SEC and ACC champs, Boise State and the winner of the Utah-TCU game would be the first eight qualifiers. Then if teams outside of those eight occupied the #3 and #4 slots in the final BCS standings, they would automatically get the last two spots. Chime in if you think I\'m misinterpreting the rules.

All of that said, I\'m not at all convinced that an 11-1 Stanford will be in the top four. I hope so, but it\'s easy to see a scenario where the top four are: #1) undefeated Oregon; #2) one-loss Alabama; #3 undefeated Boise State; #4 one-loss Auburn (or one-loss Nebraska or undefeated TCU or one-loss Wisconsin). I actually think that a lot would have to break Stanford\'s way to finish in the top 4.

Re: This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woo - george - 11-05-2010

Currently there are 12 teams ahead of us:

1 Â Â Â Oregon Â Â Â 8-0
2 Â Â Â Auburn Â Â Â 9-0
3 Â Â Â TCU Â Â Â 9-0
4 Â Â Â Boise State Â Â Â 7-0
5 Â Â Â Utah Â Â Â 8-0
6 Â Â Â Alabama Â Â Â 7-1
7 Â Â Â Nebraska Â Â Â 7-1
8 Â Â Â Oklahoma Â Â Â 7-1
9 Â Â Â Wisconsin Â Â Â 7-1
10 Â Â Â LSU Â Â Â 7-1
11 Â Â Â Ohio State Â Â Â 8-1
12 Â Â Â Missouri Â Â Â 7-1

Assuming we win out, of the 12 above, 3 are sure to fall below us:

1) The loser of Bama-LSU (actually maybe not if alabama loses -- blech)
2) The loser of TCU-Utah
3) The loser of the Big XII championship game

It is pretty annoying that we\'re below all those big 10/12 schools.

That means that we need some help getting past 6 schools. Looks pretty bleak w/o some Mack Brown-esque d-baggery.

But we can always hope:

Hawaii upsets BSU
Alabama beats LSU
Auburn beats Alabama
Baylor beats OU and wins the B12 title
Michigan goes on a tear, beats tOSU and Wisc thus locking up RR for life :)

Unfortunately the scenarios for which at least 4 teams finish ahead of us are much more numerous and plausible.

Re: This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woo - Ratmandoo - 11-05-2010

Quote:I really hope we get a full crowd on Saturday. It\'s really pretty embarrassing that it\'s #10 vs #13 in week 9 and we\'re nowhere near a sellout. Ratmandoo, are we going to drive up for the game to do our part?

George - I just got our tickets. We\'re driving up tomorrow morning.

Re: This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woo - george - 11-05-2010

Sweet! Â Which of the cardboard faithful will be joining us?

Re: This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woo - Leftcoast - 11-06-2010

Roll call? Â HEEERE!

Well, I\'ll be in one of my regular seats with my 11 year old - Section 115, shady side, 5 rows from the field. Â Looking forward to this one.

Re: This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woo - CompSci87 - 11-06-2010

I\'ll be there with a friend and his wife. Doing my part to raise attendance! Section 118.

Re: This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woo - george - 11-06-2010

That was amazing. We were in section 126 on the sunny side. The attendance on the shady side looked pretty good. Still that game shouldve been a sellout. What a show! Â It\'ll make the drive back to la tonight totally worth it. Â

Sent my progeny - Redrum - 11-06-2010

The Redrumette was under orders and she obeyed. Â Phoned with news of the final touchdown, Â which was missed by a whole bunch of us whom -- with about five minutes left-- ABC deemed more interested in Missouri/Texas Tech with five.

Re: This not, repeat NOT, counting chickens or woo - pefloresjr - 11-06-2010

In my normal seats in section 131 sunny side. Â What a great game. Â Arizona is a good team and didn\'t ease up/give up until late in the game. Â They actually gained a lot of yards but Stanford\'s D came up with big stops most of the time and Arizona\'s yards ended up amounting to few points. Â What a joy this season has been. Â

I have to check my dvr; I can\'t believe that ABC cut away here in the bay area. Â What a bunch of yahoos.

cheers,
Pete F.