[washingtonismoney]

Interesting article that gives Stanford an 81% chance of winning Saturday.

wellll, sort of. Connelly views full-season stats as more predictive. However, if you're inclined to see the last eight games as a meaningful unit, then you'd agree with the 81% prediction. In this case, there's at least some reason (the Sark Helton change) to think this way.

[washingtonismoney]

Interesting article that gives Stanford an 81% chance of winning Saturday.

wellll, sort of. Connelly views full-season stats as more predictive. However, if you're inclined to see the last eight games as a meaningful unit, then you'd agree with the 81% prediction. In this case, there's at least some reason (the Sark Helton change) to think this way.

[stupac2]

wellll, sort of. Connelly views full-season stats as more predictive. However, if you're inclined to see the last eight games as a meaningful unit, then you'd agree with the 81% prediction. In this case, there's at least some reason (the Sark Helton change) to think this way.

And Stanford's rating hardly changes, going from 15.2 to 16.3. USC's craters from 13.6 to 0.9. That latter number matches up with my finding of "USC is barely better than an average team under Helton", and the former makes sense since we're not really playing better than we were in games 3 and 4 (games 1 and 2 were clearly our worst this year, I think).

I'd still rather be playing Utah or UCLA, but I'm not quite as anxious as I was when USC first beat UCLA. That will return on Saturday, though, I'm sure.

[stupac2]

wellll, sort of. Connelly views full-season stats as more predictive. However, if you're inclined to see the last eight games as a meaningful unit, then you'd agree with the 81% prediction. In this case, there's at least some reason (the Sark Helton change) to think this way.

And Stanford's rating hardly changes, going from 15.2 to 16.3. USC's craters from 13.6 to 0.9. That latter number matches up with my finding of "USC is barely better than an average team under Helton", and the former makes sense since we're not really playing better than we were in games 3 and 4 (games 1 and 2 were clearly our worst this year, I think).

I'd still rather be playing Utah or UCLA, but I'm not quite as anxious as I was when USC first beat UCLA. That will return on Saturday, though, I'm sure.

[fullmetal]

U$C will surely come to their senses and adopt the crash-the-line run defensive strategy that went 2-2 against us (NU, WSU, UO, USB) and 4-0 in causing Cardiac Cardinal games.  We'll see if the coaching braintrust recognizes its potential presence early and adapts accordingly...(we're not so willing to adapt).

[fullmetal]

U$C will surely come to their senses and adopt the crash-the-line run defensive strategy that went 2-2 against us (NU, WSU, UO, USB) and 4-0 in causing Cardiac Cardinal games.  We'll see if the coaching braintrust recognizes its potential presence early and adapts accordingly...(we're not so willing to adapt).

[stupac2]

U$C will surely come to their senses and adopt the crash-the-line run defensive strategy that went 2-2 against us (NU, WSU, UO, USB) and 4-0 in causing Cardiac Cardinal games.  We'll see if the coaching braintrust recognizes its potential presence early and adapts accordingly...(we're not so willing to adapt).

Supposedly one the spots where USC has been hammered by injuries is linebacker (the other is OL). So that strategy might not work for them if the guys doing it are picking the wrong gaps to attack.

[stupac2]

U$C will surely come to their senses and adopt the crash-the-line run defensive strategy that went 2-2 against us (NU, WSU, UO, USB) and 4-0 in causing Cardiac Cardinal games.  We'll see if the coaching braintrust recognizes its potential presence early and adapts accordingly...(we're not so willing to adapt).

Supposedly one the spots where USC has been hammered by injuries is linebacker (the other is OL). So that strategy might not work for them if the guys doing it are picking the wrong gaps to attack.

[fullmetal]

We'll see what their replacements are made of.  Discipline is required for disguising blitzes against our experienced OL.

[fullmetal]

We'll see what their replacements are made of.  Discipline is required for disguising blitzes against our experienced OL.

[CTcard]

U$C will surely come to their senses and adopt the crash-the-line run defensive strategy that went 2-2 against us (NU, WSU, UO, USB) and 4-0 in causing Cardiac Cardinal games. 

From what I remember, the crash-the-line run defensive strategy went 2-10 against us.

[At least I don't think anyone did that less than NU, probably UO. Though indeed, I don't recall each defensive strategy individually with that much clarity.]

[CTcard]

U$C will surely come to their senses and adopt the crash-the-line run defensive strategy that went 2-2 against us (NU, WSU, UO, USB) and 4-0 in causing Cardiac Cardinal games. 

From what I remember, the crash-the-line run defensive strategy went 2-10 against us.

[At least I don't think anyone did that less than NU, probably UO. Though indeed, I don't recall each defensive strategy individually with that much clarity.]

[PrinceLightfoot]

A few comments...

USC should be the one's who are anxious. Their defense is no where close to what we faced the third week of the season. Will they stop the run? Can they cover a pass over the middle with backup, inexperienced and recently injured LBs? Their offensive line is also a shadow of it is third-week-self with a 4th string converted OT at center.

Their receivers will pose problems for our secondary again, but our offense will score more points methodically. We must stop the run.

Stanford has the big game experience and is the team most capable of sustaining their "A" game.

The emotionally drained team is the one that beat its cross-town rival after lossing to them the last three seasons. Had we been behind the entire game versus ND and then won on the final drive, then I would entertain the idea of our guys being affected by coming off a emotional high like we did vs Washington in 2012 after beating USC.

[PrinceLightfoot]

A few comments...

USC should be the one's who are anxious. Their defense is no where close to what we faced the third week of the season. Will they stop the run? Can they cover a pass over the middle with backup, inexperienced and recently injured LBs? Their offensive line is also a shadow of it is third-week-self with a 4th string converted OT at center.

Their receivers will pose problems for our secondary again, but our offense will score more points methodically. We must stop the run.

Stanford has the big game experience and is the team most capable of sustaining their "A" game.

The emotionally drained team is the one that beat its cross-town rival after lossing to them the last three seasons. Had we been behind the entire game versus ND and then won on the final drive, then I would entertain the idea of our guys being affected by coming off a emotional high like we did vs Washington in 2012 after beating USC.

[needle]

Is there any data on playoff or bowl rematches?

I remember several years ago UW beating Nebraska in a bowl game after earlier in the season getting thumped pretty badly. There was also the LSU-Bama rematch in the title game a few years back, with Alabama winning after a loss earlier in the season to LSU.

I also remember the Pac-12 title game against UCLA being much closer than the game played a week (I think) earlier against the same team.

I would like to see data, but I suspect the rematch favors the team that lost earlier. I would guess it might be a psychological advantage, as the loser knows with certainty that they must execute at a higher level than previously.

[needle]

Is there any data on playoff or bowl rematches?

I remember several years ago UW beating Nebraska in a bowl game after earlier in the season getting thumped pretty badly. There was also the LSU-Bama rematch in the title game a few years back, with Alabama winning after a loss earlier in the season to LSU.

I also remember the Pac-12 title game against UCLA being much closer than the game played a week (I think) earlier against the same team.

I would like to see data, but I suspect the rematch favors the team that lost earlier. I would guess it might be a psychological advantage, as the loser knows with certainty that they must execute at a higher level than previously.

[CrazedZooChimp]

Is there any data on playoff or bowl rematches?

I remember several years ago UW beating Nebraska in a bowl game after earlier in the season getting thumped pretty badly. There was also the LSU-Bama rematch in the title game a few years back, with Alabama winning after a loss earlier in the season to LSU.

I also remember the Pac-12 title game against UCLA being much closer than the game played a week (I think) earlier against the same team.

I would like to see data, but I suspect the rematch favors the team that lost earlier. I would guess it might be a psychological advantage, as the loser knows with certainty that they must execute at a higher level than previously.

I would think you're right if the games are close to each other, but with the $C game being so early in the season, and with a different head coach, hard to see it having much effect.  Bowl games are hard to compare because that includes several weeks of preparation, not one week.  The best comparison may be our game two years ago against ASU who we had played in September as well.  Those two games showed no significant difference in resistance by the Devils :)

There may be some rematches in other conference champ games, but it's probably less common because of their wimpy 8 game schedules.

[CrazedZooChimp]

Is there any data on playoff or bowl rematches?

I remember several years ago UW beating Nebraska in a bowl game after earlier in the season getting thumped pretty badly. There was also the LSU-Bama rematch in the title game a few years back, with Alabama winning after a loss earlier in the season to LSU.

I also remember the Pac-12 title game against UCLA being much closer than the game played a week (I think) earlier against the same team.

I would like to see data, but I suspect the rematch favors the team that lost earlier. I would guess it might be a psychological advantage, as the loser knows with certainty that they must execute at a higher level than previously.

I would think you're right if the games are close to each other, but with the $C game being so early in the season, and with a different head coach, hard to see it having much effect.  Bowl games are hard to compare because that includes several weeks of preparation, not one week.  The best comparison may be our game two years ago against ASU who we had played in September as well.  Those two games showed no significant difference in resistance by the Devils :)

There may be some rematches in other conference champ games, but it's probably less common because of their wimpy 8 game schedules.

[BostonCard]

The results of a rematch are basically a coin flip, according to this article from 2012:

http://newsok.com/article/3636904

Of the 41 rematches that I found in college football history, the loser of Game 1 is 21-20 in Game 2.

BC

[BostonCard]

The results of a rematch are basically a coin flip, according to this article from 2012:

http://newsok.com/article/3636904

Of the 41 rematches that I found in college football history, the loser of Game 1 is 21-20 in Game 2.

BC

[pcgoode]

USC has not scored more than three touchdowns on offence per game since they beat Arizona on November 7.

[pcgoode]

USC has not scored more than three touchdowns on offence per game since they beat Arizona on November 7.

[stupac2]

Unbelievably Spoiled Children has not scored more than three touchdowns on offence per game since they beat Arizona on November 7.

I saw that in Hank's post, pretty surprising for a team that's supposedly enjoying an offensive revival, especially going up against some pretty weak defenses (although UCLA is good and Oregon seems to have improved as the year progressed).

[stupac2]

Unbelievably Spoiled Children has not scored more than three touchdowns on offence per game since they beat Arizona on November 7.

I saw that in Hank's post, pretty surprising for a team that's supposedly enjoying an offensive revival, especially going up against some pretty weak defenses (although UCLA is good and Oregon seems to have improved as the year progressed).