[Papa John]

I'm not sure if this has been posted elsewhere on the CARDboard, but, over the past couple of weeks, ESPN's Pac-12 blog has offered a season preview for each Pac-12 team:
http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/tag/_/name...m-previews

Below I've culled the projected win percentages and chances to win the conference for each team:
UO: .864 win %, 53.3% chance to win the Pac-12
UCLA: .734, 20.2
USC: .711, 10.8
Stanford: .680, 6.2
ASU: .671, 6.5
UW: .607, 0.7
OSU: .590, 0.9
UA: .548, 1.1
WSU: .425, 0.1
UU: .421, 0.2
CU: .362, 0.0
Cal: .313, 0.0

I have no idea what methodology ESPN.com Stats & Information used to generate these data, but I am surprised by the .680 projected winning percentage for Stanford. Over 12 games, that would yield an 8-win season. This seems low to me, but I suppose that's because these days I look at Stanford football through rose-colored glasses.

[Papa John]

I'm not sure if this has been posted elsewhere on the CARDboard, but, over the past couple of weeks, ESPN's Pac-12 blog has offered a season preview for each Pac-12 team:
http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/tag/_/name...m-previews

Below I've culled the projected win percentages and chances to win the conference for each team:
UO: .864 win %, 53.3% chance to win the Pac-12
UCLA: .734, 20.2
USC: .711, 10.8
Stanford: .680, 6.2
ASU: .671, 6.5
UW: .607, 0.7
OSU: .590, 0.9
UA: .548, 1.1
WSU: .425, 0.1
UU: .421, 0.2
CU: .362, 0.0
Cal: .313, 0.0

I have no idea what methodology ESPN.com Stats & Information used to generate these data, but I am surprised by the .680 projected winning percentage for Stanford. Over 12 games, that would yield an 8-win season. This seems low to me, but I suppose that's because these days I look at Stanford football through rose-colored glasses.

[OutsiderFan]

Stanford will always be undervalued in pre-season projections if they are at all based on recruiting rankings, which it would seem they are at least in part, and because they don't take into account the unique factors that have led to Stanford's success.

Does anyone here think the fact Stanford fields a team of guys who got into Stanford, has nothing to do with Stanford football's success?  How about Shannon Turley's S&C program that has reduced injuries and increased recovery times so much?  The combination of recruiting the right guys that fit Stanford (tough, competitive, passion for football), and the way those players have been developed, makes Stanford undervalued when compared to its peers, IMO.  Throw in a great coaching staff, and the sum total is more than the component parts, maybe more than any other program around.

Most people would take USC's roster over Stanford's every day of every year and twice on Sunday, but Stanford has beaten USC routinely over the last five years, and should have a five game winning streak.  I think the most optimistic Stanford observers on this board see all the intangibles that have led to success before, and now see maybe the deepest and most talented Stanford roster ever, and can't help but project continued success.  The only possible variable that might be a bit different for Stanford this year than other years is the fact the teams Stanford plays are considered better and Stanford plays more better teams than any of the top PAC-12 contenders.

I sure would be curious to know what Florida State, Alabama, and Ohio State's projected win totals would be against Stanford's schedule.

[OutsiderFan]

Stanford will always be undervalued in pre-season projections if they are at all based on recruiting rankings, which it would seem they are at least in part, and because they don't take into account the unique factors that have led to Stanford's success.

Does anyone here think the fact Stanford fields a team of guys who got into Stanford, has nothing to do with Stanford football's success?  How about Shannon Turley's S&C program that has reduced injuries and increased recovery times so much?  The combination of recruiting the right guys that fit Stanford (tough, competitive, passion for football), and the way those players have been developed, makes Stanford undervalued when compared to its peers, IMO.  Throw in a great coaching staff, and the sum total is more than the component parts, maybe more than any other program around.

Most people would take USC's roster over Stanford's every day of every year and twice on Sunday, but Stanford has beaten USC routinely over the last five years, and should have a five game winning streak.  I think the most optimistic Stanford observers on this board see all the intangibles that have led to success before, and now see maybe the deepest and most talented Stanford roster ever, and can't help but project continued success.  The only possible variable that might be a bit different for Stanford this year than other years is the fact the teams Stanford plays are considered better and Stanford plays more better teams than any of the top PAC-12 contenders.

I sure would be curious to know what Florida State, Alabama, and Ohio State's projected win totals would be against Stanford's schedule.

[StanFan88]

Most people would take University of Spoiled Children 's roster over Stanford's every day of every year and twice on Sunday

Not this guy.  That roster is shallow, and they are learning a new system with a new HC.  I will be surprised if they win more than 8 games, but I am glad that they are playing here in Week 2 and not Week 10.  They will be a better team at the end of the year - by a lot.

I think Oregon is one of the 2 or 3 most overrated teams in the nation.  Mariotta may be the best QB in the nation but he doesn't play defense.  They lost as much on defense as Stanford - if not more - and they don't have the same depth.  Nov 1 in Autzen is still going to be a war, but I'm quietly optimistic because Oregon continues to have a Stanford problem.

[StanFan88]

Most people would take University of Spoiled Children 's roster over Stanford's every day of every year and twice on Sunday

Not this guy.  That roster is shallow, and they are learning a new system with a new HC.  I will be surprised if they win more than 8 games, but I am glad that they are playing here in Week 2 and not Week 10.  They will be a better team at the end of the year - by a lot.

I think Oregon is one of the 2 or 3 most overrated teams in the nation.  Mariotta may be the best QB in the nation but he doesn't play defense.  They lost as much on defense as Stanford - if not more - and they don't have the same depth.  Nov 1 in Autzen is still going to be a war, but I'm quietly optimistic because Oregon continues to have a Stanford problem.

[stupac2]

They will be a better team at the end of the year - by a lot.

I don't think that they can have a shallow roster and also have this be true. If the roster isn't deep then it can only take one injury at a key position to completely hobble a team.

[stupac2]

They will be a better team at the end of the year - by a lot.

I don't think that they can have a shallow roster and also have this be true. If the roster isn't deep then it can only take one injury at a key position to completely hobble a team.

[StanFan88]

They will be a better team later in the year because the players will have more experience with Sark's system.  Injuries are always a factor, and yes if they are significant then that will impact them.  But you can't predict that - you can predict increased comfort level with a new coach and new system.

[StanFan88]

They will be a better team later in the year because the players will have more experience with Sark's system.  Injuries are always a factor, and yes if they are significant then that will impact them.  But you can't predict that - you can predict increased comfort level with a new coach and new system.