[george]

The call went out and the response was decidedly "meh" on whether people wanted to do predictions, but this is my tiny contribution to this thoughtful community.  Thanks to everyone for making this a place I still check on an almost daily basis even when everything around us seems to be on fire.

On to the first game of the season.  Last year I tried the whole "13-0 still on the table" declaration and that was widely met with derision.  So this year I'll just defer to the more insightful minds on the board.  How do you think we'll fare against the Raiders?

[george]

The call went out and the response was decidedly "meh" on whether people wanted to do predictions, but this is my tiny contribution to this thoughtful community.  Thanks to everyone for making this a place I still check on an almost daily basis even when everything around us seems to be on fire.

On to the first game of the season.  Last year I tried the whole "13-0 still on the table" declaration and that was widely met with derision.  So this year I'll just defer to the more insightful minds on the board.  How do you think we'll fare against the Raiders?

[msqueri]

We'll be able to pick the score. Even if this is a 2-10 team we'll beat Colgate by a million. Just for the sake of putting a score out there I'll just say the Rice score: 62-7. But really it should just be whatever score we want it to be. Any first downs the defense gives up will be a failure and any drives the offense doesn't score a touchdown will be a failure. If anything, I think the margin may be less than anybody would guess because the completely injury-obsessed Shaw is going to put Patu, Harris (I hope), McLaughlin, Rogers, Archer, Farrell, etc. in the game as soon as he can. This isn't a real game and it will tell us absolutely zero about the season.

[msqueri]

We'll be able to pick the score. Even if this is a 2-10 team we'll beat Colgate by a million. Just for the sake of putting a score out there I'll just say the Rice score: 62-7. But really it should just be whatever score we want it to be. Any first downs the defense gives up will be a failure and any drives the offense doesn't score a touchdown will be a failure. If anything, I think the margin may be less than anybody would guess because the completely injury-obsessed Shaw is going to put Patu, Harris (I hope), McLaughlin, Rogers, Archer, Farrell, etc. in the game as soon as he can. This isn't a real game and it will tell us absolutely zero about the season.

[george]

I'll just say the Rice score: 62-7. 

Awesome, can you fill that out by clicking the "Make Prediction" button near the top of this page? ^^

[george]

I'll just say the Rice score: 62-7. 

Awesome, can you fill that out by clicking the "Make Prediction" button near the top of this page? ^^

[Mick]

I like doing predictions.  And Stanford will beat Colgate with ease.  Colgate will score too many points as Shaw eases off on both the brake and the gas.  Hope not, but...history.

[Mick]

I like doing predictions.  And Stanford will beat Colgate with ease.  Colgate will score too many points as Shaw eases off on both the brake and the gas.  Hope not, but...history.

[standfan]

Colgate lost to Boston College 51–0 in the opening game last season. I’ll say Stanford wins by that score, a more aspirational than predictive guess.

[standfan]

Colgate lost to Boston College 51–0 in the opening game last season. I’ll say Stanford wins by that score, a more aspirational than predictive guess.

[Snorlax94]

The 1991 Stanford-Cornell game, which the Cardinal won, 56-6, provides a model for this mismatch.

Stanford will make enough mistakes (fumbled punt, blown coverage, or biting on a trick play) that Colgate may get close enough to kick a couple field goals, so I predict 6 for the Toothpaste.

Stanford has enough elite offensive athleticism that they could score over 60, but Shaw won’t show any of the passing attack he is saving for USC, and he will pull EJ Smith pretty early. Some coaches like to practice their season’s system in their FCS game — like Oregon running their spread against Portland State — but Shaw is the type to hide everything he can.

I would predict an even lower score for a conservative, scheme-hiding, clock-chewing Stanford, but the team won’t be able to help returning a kickoff/punt and an interception or two.

Stanford, 49-6 (entered)

[Snorlax94]

The 1991 Stanford-Cornell game, which the Cardinal won, 56-6, provides a model for this mismatch.

Stanford will make enough mistakes (fumbled punt, blown coverage, or biting on a trick play) that Colgate may get close enough to kick a couple field goals, so I predict 6 for the Toothpaste.

Stanford has enough elite offensive athleticism that they could score over 60, but Shaw won’t show any of the passing attack he is saving for USC, and he will pull EJ Smith pretty early. Some coaches like to practice their season’s system in their FCS game — like Oregon running their spread against Portland State — but Shaw is the type to hide everything he can.

I would predict an even lower score for a conservative, scheme-hiding, clock-chewing Stanford, but the team won’t be able to help returning a kickoff/punt and an interception or two.

Stanford, 49-6 (entered)

[cardcrimson]

My prediction:

A late heat wave brings upper 90's to the Farm; attendance is listed at 26.873, but only 13k or so actually show up.

Stanford wins a snoozer, 38-13.

[cardcrimson]

My prediction:

A late heat wave brings upper 90's to the Farm; attendance is listed at 26.873, but only 13k or so actually show up.

Stanford wins a snoozer, 38-13.

[standfan]

Colgate lost to Boston College 51–0 in the opening game last season. I’ll say Stanford wins by that score, a more aspirational than predictive guess.

[standfan]

Colgate lost to Boston College 51–0 in the opening game last season. I’ll say Stanford wins by that score, a more aspirational than predictive guess.

[lex24]

Stanford will start slow.  But after a few brushes with bad results, they will improve their Aim.  They are, after all Ultra-Brite.  In the end, they will reach the Crest.  Win 42-10.  Looking forward to the Close-Up of the happy squad as they head to the locker room.

[lex24]

Stanford will start slow.  But after a few brushes with bad results, they will improve their Aim.  They are, after all Ultra-Brite.  In the end, they will reach the Crest.  Win 42-10.  Looking forward to the Close-Up of the happy squad as they head to the locker room.

[cardcrimson]

Stanford will start slow.  But after a few brushes with bad results, they will improve their Aim.  They are, after all Ultra-Brite.  In the end, they will reach the Crest.  Win 42-10.  Looking forward to the Close-Up of the happy squad as they head to the locker room.

Depends on the scope of the play calling

[cardcrimson]

Stanford will start slow.  But after a few brushes with bad results, they will improve their Aim.  They are, after all Ultra-Brite.  In the end, they will reach the Crest.  Win 42-10.  Looking forward to the Close-Up of the happy squad as they head to the locker room.

Depends on the scope of the play calling

[Phogge]

Five Stanford starters cannot play because their imaginary girlfriends test positive. Stanford pulls it out in the fourth Q 31-17.

[Phogge]

Five Stanford starters cannot play because their imaginary girlfriends test positive. Stanford pulls it out in the fourth Q 31-17.

[Jskass]

Having attended the 51-0 disaster at BC, I know Colgate will be much better but still not close, so predict 51-14 Stanford.

[Jskass]

Having attended the 51-0 disaster at BC, I know Colgate will be much better but still not close, so predict 51-14 Stanford.

[gailtate]

Stanford will start slow.  But after a few brushes with bad results, they will improve their Aim.  They are, after all Ultra-Brite.  In the end, they will reach the Crest.  Win 42-10.  Looking forward to the Close-Up of the happy squad as they head to the locker room.

Depends on the scope of the play calling

Hope no one gets hurt in pre-game drills.

[gailtate]

Stanford will start slow.  But after a few brushes with bad results, they will improve their Aim.  They are, after all Ultra-Brite.  In the end, they will reach the Crest.  Win 42-10.  Looking forward to the Close-Up of the happy squad as they head to the locker room.

Depends on the scope of the play calling

Hope no one gets hurt in pre-game drills.

[MV72018]

Stanford 28  Colgate 17. 

We'll probably hear the usual "We didn't want to reveal too much of the playbook" afterwards. McKee will probably be able to pass on Colgate fairly easily but how good our running game will be against the Raiders is unclear. Frankly, it's pathetic that Stanford put weakling Colgate on its schedule. That seems a trend at Stanford, including basketball's propensity for putting a lot of games against marshmallows on the pre-conference schedule. Why not play Menlo College next year? That might be more of a challenge than Colgate.

[MV72018]

Stanford 28  Colgate 17. 

We'll probably hear the usual "We didn't want to reveal too much of the playbook" afterwards. McKee will probably be able to pass on Colgate fairly easily but how good our running game will be against the Raiders is unclear. Frankly, it's pathetic that Stanford put weakling Colgate on its schedule. That seems a trend at Stanford, including basketball's propensity for putting a lot of games against marshmallows on the pre-conference schedule. Why not play Menlo College next year? That might be more of a challenge than Colgate.

[old spanish trail]

McKee throws for 3 touchdowns in the first qtr and they then work on the run game. Colgate gets 2 field goals. Score 35-6.

[old spanish trail]

McKee throws for 3 touchdowns in the first qtr and they then work on the run game. Colgate gets 2 field goals. Score 35-6.

[TonyLima]

Stanford 28  Colgate 17. 

We'll probably hear the usual "We didn't want to reveal too much of the playbook" afterwards. McKee will probably be able to pass on Colgate fairly easily but how good our running game will be against the Raiders is unclear. Frankly, it's pathetic that Stanford put weakling Colgate on its schedule. That seems a trend at Stanford, including basketball's propensity for putting a lot of games against marshmallows on the pre-conference schedule. Why not play Menlo College next year? That might be more of a challenge than Colgate.

This is consistent with the current AD and Stanford administration who seem to want Stanford athletics to be “Ivy League West.”

[TonyLima]

Stanford 28  Colgate 17. 

We'll probably hear the usual "We didn't want to reveal too much of the playbook" afterwards. McKee will probably be able to pass on Colgate fairly easily but how good our running game will be against the Raiders is unclear. Frankly, it's pathetic that Stanford put weakling Colgate on its schedule. That seems a trend at Stanford, including basketball's propensity for putting a lot of games against marshmallows on the pre-conference schedule. Why not play Menlo College next year? That might be more of a challenge than Colgate.

This is consistent with the current AD and Stanford administration who seem to want Stanford athletics to be “Ivy League West.”

[lex24]

Stanford 28  Colgate 17. 

We'll probably hear the usual "We didn't want to reveal too much of the playbook" afterwards. McKee will probably be able to pass on Colgate fairly easily but how good our running game will be against the Raiders is unclear. Frankly, it's pathetic that Stanford put weakling Colgate on its schedule. That seems a trend at Stanford, including basketball's propensity for putting a lot of games against marshmallows on the pre-conference schedule. Why not play Menlo College next year? That might be more of a challenge than Colgate.

Say what you will about Stanford football; but they cannot be accused of playing weak schedules. Year in and year out they play one of the toughest schedules in the country. They seldom play a cookie. So I have no problem with this one

[lex24]

Stanford 28  Colgate 17. 

We'll probably hear the usual "We didn't want to reveal too much of the playbook" afterwards. McKee will probably be able to pass on Colgate fairly easily but how good our running game will be against the Raiders is unclear. Frankly, it's pathetic that Stanford put weakling Colgate on its schedule. That seems a trend at Stanford, including basketball's propensity for putting a lot of games against marshmallows on the pre-conference schedule. Why not play Menlo College next year? That might be more of a challenge than Colgate.

Say what you will about Stanford football; but they cannot be accused of playing weak schedules. Year in and year out they play one of the toughest schedules in the country. They seldom play a cookie. So I have no problem with this one

[JohnR34231]

Stanford 28  Colgate 17. 

We'll probably hear the usual "We didn't want to reveal too much of the playbook" afterwards. McKee will probably be able to pass on Colgate fairly easily but how good our running game will be against the Raiders is unclear. Frankly, it's pathetic that Stanford put weakling Colgate on its schedule. That seems a trend at Stanford, including basketball's propensity for putting a lot of games against marshmallows on the pre-conference schedule. Why not play Menlo College next year? That might be more of a challenge than Colgate.

Say what you will about Stanford football; but they cannot be accused of playing weak schedules. Year in and year out they play one of the toughest schedules in the country. They seldom play a cookie. So I have no problem with this one

Also, check out the schedules of the top teams in the nation. You'll find almost all of them play one cupcake (and sometimes more) a year. Stanford is hardly doing anything other schools don't.

[JohnR34231]

Stanford 28  Colgate 17. 

We'll probably hear the usual "We didn't want to reveal too much of the playbook" afterwards. McKee will probably be able to pass on Colgate fairly easily but how good our running game will be against the Raiders is unclear. Frankly, it's pathetic that Stanford put weakling Colgate on its schedule. That seems a trend at Stanford, including basketball's propensity for putting a lot of games against marshmallows on the pre-conference schedule. Why not play Menlo College next year? That might be more of a challenge than Colgate.

Say what you will about Stanford football; but they cannot be accused of playing weak schedules. Year in and year out they play one of the toughest schedules in the country. They seldom play a cookie. So I have no problem with this one

Also, check out the schedules of the top teams in the nation. You'll find almost all of them play one cupcake (and sometimes more) a year. Stanford is hardly doing anything other schools don't.

[Mick]

It's a long season, we don't have a deep bench, and we already have injury problems.  I'd prefer to play Little Sisters of the Poor, Cupcake U., and CalTech's backup "B" division intramural team for our three OOC opponents.  I'd take San Jose State, Hawaii and some very academically-qualified, athletically-challenged football team other than that.

[Mick]

It's a long season, we don't have a deep bench, and we already have injury problems.  I'd prefer to play Little Sisters of the Poor, Cupcake U., and CalTech's backup "B" division intramural team for our three OOC opponents.  I'd take San Jose State, Hawaii and some very academically-qualified, athletically-challenged football team other than that.

[JeffInCorvallis]

Maybe it's just my browser but at the top of the page it cycles through everyone's predictions and at the moment everyone is predicting precisely the same 42-10 Stanford win. That's not what I put in so it seems like something is wrong.

[JeffInCorvallis]

Maybe it's just my browser but at the top of the page it cycles through everyone's predictions and at the moment everyone is predicting precisely the same 42-10 Stanford win. That's not what I put in so it seems like something is wrong.