The CardBoard
Gimpy Pimp indeed! - 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: Gimpy Pimp indeed! (/thread-7553.html)


Gimpy Pimp indeed! - Rally - 08-19-2014

This is an amazing analysis if read to the end.  Expresses many of the thoughts shared here in various threads.

http://www.ruleoftree.com/2014/8/19/6006729/2014-stanford-opponent-previews-usc-trojans

Re: Gimpy Pimp indeed! - fullmetal - 08-20-2014

They'll give Stanford a game...but the Cardinal are out for revenge.

I unreservedly endorse article's closing game scenario - Redrum - 08-20-2014

Hate to say it,  the Trojans are coming back.  Might already be back.  I never subscribed to the "iron sharpens iron"  mantra about playing good teams.  When it comes to USC,  I prefer the "iron shreds the quesadilla" outcome.  From last year's game, we know USC has the offense.  They moved against a VERY good Stanford defense for a large part of that game.  I'm afraid that their DC,  Wilcox,  will be a notch better with USC's talent.  Last year, a notch better would have been enough to keep Sarkisian from his UDub meltdown.

Re: Gimpy Pimp indeed! - Bruce Wang - 08-20-2014

Where's the UC Davis preview?!?!?  That's the game we need to focus on aka the next game.

Re: Gimpy Pimp indeed! - 2 for 2028 - 08-20-2014

(08-20-2014, 08:16 AM)Publius link Wrote:Where's the The school that shall not be mentioned preview?!?!?  That's the game we need to focus on aka the next game.

And who is starting up the "predict the score" contest thread?  We'll probably need several days to debate the scoring system again.

Re: Gimpy Pimp indeed! - Rally - 08-20-2014

(08-20-2014, 08:16 AM)Publius link Wrote:Where's the The school that shall not be mentioned preview?!?!?  That's the game we need to focus on aka the next game.

Here you go:

http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/9441

Re: I unreservedly endorse article's closing game scenario - Extra Point - 08-20-2014

(08-20-2014, 08:05 AM)Redrum link Wrote:I'm afraid that their DC,  Wilcox,  will be a notch better with University of Spoiled Children 's talent.

Part of Wilcox's defensive stategy against Stanford a few years ago was to have his safeties pull back into pass protection whenever Luck audibled. When Stanford figured this out, Luck simply audibled running plays. This brilliant plan cost the Huskies 65 points.

Re: I unreservedly endorse article's closing game scenario - stupac2 - 08-20-2014

(08-20-2014, 09:18 AM)Extra Point link Wrote:Part of Wilcox's defensive stategy against Stanford a few years ago was to have his safeties pull back into pass protection whenever Luck audibled. When Stanford figured this out, Luck simply audibled running plays. This brilliant plan cost the Huskies 65 points.

Wilcox only joined Washington in 2012. His first game against us was the road loss.

Re: I unreservedly endorse article's closing game scenario - CTcard - 08-20-2014

(08-20-2014, 08:05 AM)Redrum link Wrote:Hate to say it,  the Literature's Most Famous Losers are coming back.  Might already be back.  ...  From last year's game, we know University of Spoiled Children  has the offense.  They moved against a VERY good Stanford defense for a large part of that game.  I'm afraid that their DC,  Wilcox,  will be a notch better with University of Spoiled Children 's talent.  Last year, a notch better would have been enough to keep Sarkisian from his UDub meltdown.

S-C may or may not be back. They'll certainly have talent, they always do.  I suspect with their tradition, LA-location, and resources that they'll always recruit well.

However, it appears you turned off the Stanford-USC game last year after the first quarter. In their first 3 drives they totaled 17 points and about 200 yards. The rest of the way they had 3 points and much less than 150 yards. For the game S-C had 311 yds, less than our average allowed of 343 yds. On the other hand, their D was very good - holding us to 337 yds, well under our average of 405 yds/gm.

Wilcox does appear to be a very good DC. No doubt S-C will have a good D again. Whether Kessler is a high-tempo, spread QB is something apparently we'll learn this year.

Re: Gimpy Pimp indeed! - gocard14 - 08-21-2014

I see USC coming in at around the 9 or 10 win mark with a second place finish in the south.  They should have a decent offense and a very good defense, but with poor depth.  Unfortunately their lack of depth will likely hurt them far more against spread teams and later in the season, not in week 2 against our pro-style offense.

Still i expect the good guys to pull out a win in a close game.

Gimpy Pimp trademarks his name - Rally - 08-21-2014

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/24671319/which-college-football-coaches-have-tried-to-trademark-their-name

Love this part

"Sarkisian also has pending applications for “Coach Sark” and “Bark for Sark.” Presumably, Sarkisian will abandon the “Bark for Sark” application, which was filed Nov. 13, 2013, when Sarkisian was still coaching the Washington Huskies."

Re: Gimpy Pimp indeed! - Bruce Wang - 08-21-2014

I promise you this.  You will see much "Snark on Sark" coming from yours truly for at least the next year or two.

Re: Gimpy Pimp indeed! - Rally - 08-21-2014

(08-21-2014, 01:41 PM)Publius link Wrote:I promise you this.  You will see much "Snark on Sark" coming from yours truly for at least the next year or two.

Maybe you should trademark it? :)

Re: Gimpy Pimp indeed! - yvonne - 08-21-2014

Or at least register the handles: http://knowem.com