[Hank 91]

I thought it might help to have one place to put all these links, as they're going to be coming fast and furious over the next ten or eleven weeks. Here's Paul Myerberg from USA Today. He's predicting bowl matchups, and he has Washington in the CFP, with Stanford heading to the Rose Bowl as a consolation prize. (By the way, from a Stanford perspective, that's all you need to know. He doesn't say anything about the Cardinal, just slots them in Pasadena for a matchup with Ohio State.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc...669465002/

[Hank 91]

I thought it might help to have one place to put all these links, as they're going to be coming fast and furious over the next ten or eleven weeks. Here's Paul Myerberg from USA Today. He's predicting bowl matchups, and he has Washington in the CFP, with Stanford heading to the Rose Bowl as a consolation prize. (By the way, from a Stanford perspective, that's all you need to know. He doesn't say anything about the Cardinal, just slots them in Pasadena for a matchup with Ohio State.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc...669465002/

[martyup]

Boy howdy!  I'll take that!

[martyup]

Boy howdy!  I'll take that!

[Phogge]

Prefer the RB to a playoff that doesn’t have 16 teams.

[Phogge]

Prefer the RB to a playoff that doesn’t have 16 teams.

[Snorlax94]

I don’t know if this is a weird woofing thing where people don’t want to express their highest hopes.

Yes a RB is freakin’ amazing in any year, but when your recruiting pool is limited each year, a critical mass of converging factors comes only once in a while.

I think 2018 is a special opportunity like 2011 and 2015. In a way, the opportunity is even greater this year, and when each of these comes along, I gotta hope this is the one. 

Even if the odds are say, 1 in 10 that the players that need to take a step forward do so, and the team stays healthy, and gets lucky a few times, I have to say, if the cfp doesn’t happen this year, I’ll be disappointed. It’ll haunt me like the what ifs about Shayne Skov’s injury in ‘11.

[Snorlax94]

I don’t know if this is a weird woofing thing where people don’t want to express their highest hopes.

Yes a RB is freakin’ amazing in any year, but when your recruiting pool is limited each year, a critical mass of converging factors comes only once in a while.

I think 2018 is a special opportunity like 2011 and 2015. In a way, the opportunity is even greater this year, and when each of these comes along, I gotta hope this is the one. 

Even if the odds are say, 1 in 10 that the players that need to take a step forward do so, and the team stays healthy, and gets lucky a few times, I have to say, if the cfp doesn’t happen this year, I’ll be disappointed. It’ll haunt me like the what ifs about Shayne Skov’s injury in ‘11.

[CornFed]

Just saw at a sports book in Las Vegas that Stanford winning the national championship is at 40:1 odds.  How can one pass that up?  Not me baby!!

[CornFed]

Just saw at a sports book in Las Vegas that Stanford winning the national championship is at 40:1 odds.  How can one pass that up?  Not me baby!!

[wallendar]

I don’t know if this is a weird woofing thing where people don’t want to express their highest hopes.

Yes a RB is freakin’ amazing in any year, but when your recruiting pool is limited each year, a critical mass of converging factors comes only once in a while.

I think 2018 is a special opportunity like 2011 and 2015. In a way, the opportunity is even greater this year, and when each of these comes along, I gotta hope this is the one. 

Even if the odds are say, 1 in 10 that the players that need to take a step forward do so, and the team stays healthy, and gets lucky a few times, I have to say, if the cfp doesn’t happen this year, I’ll be disappointed. It’ll haunt me like the what ifs about Shayne Skov’s injury in ‘11.

It is interesting that you noted 2011 and 2015 as special opportunities because both featured the odd-year schedule.  One of the problems this year is the even-year slate.  It could be the difference between a special year and a darn good one....

[wallendar]

I don’t know if this is a weird woofing thing where people don’t want to express their highest hopes.

Yes a RB is freakin’ amazing in any year, but when your recruiting pool is limited each year, a critical mass of converging factors comes only once in a while.

I think 2018 is a special opportunity like 2011 and 2015. In a way, the opportunity is even greater this year, and when each of these comes along, I gotta hope this is the one. 

Even if the odds are say, 1 in 10 that the players that need to take a step forward do so, and the team stays healthy, and gets lucky a few times, I have to say, if the cfp doesn’t happen this year, I’ll be disappointed. It’ll haunt me like the what ifs about Shayne Skov’s injury in ‘11.

It is interesting that you noted 2011 and 2015 as special opportunities because both featured the odd-year schedule.  One of the problems this year is the even-year slate.  It could be the difference between a special year and a darn good one....

[ColoradoTree]

It is interesting that you noted 2011 and 2015 as special opportunities because both featured the odd-year schedule.  One of the problems this year is the even-year slate.  It could be the difference between a special year and a darn good one....

Agreed.  Washington State getting better makes the home slate a little less awful, but that road slate is still just brutal.  Oregon dipping a bit doesn't move the needle because Washington has gotten better.  And Chip Kelly will make that UCLA game tougher than it was under Mora.  

On the bright side, taking just one loss on that schedule might be enough for the playoff.

[ColoradoTree]

It is interesting that you noted 2011 and 2015 as special opportunities because both featured the odd-year schedule.  One of the problems this year is the even-year slate.  It could be the difference between a special year and a darn good one....

Agreed.  Washington State getting better makes the home slate a little less awful, but that road slate is still just brutal.  Oregon dipping a bit doesn't move the needle because Washington has gotten better.  And Chip Kelly will make that UCLA game tougher than it was under Mora.  

On the bright side, taking just one loss on that schedule might be enough for the playoff.

[Snorlax94]

Sigh, I lnow, I know, the even-numbered year road schedule makes the situation tough. But I’d rather take this team over a lesser team with a better home schedule.

And if I got to pick my poison, I’d rather play UW in Seattle without John Ross and Dante Pettis than at home with them. (Vs the nightmare 2016 with Ross, Pettis, McClatcher, in Seattle, with a freshly depleted secondary). I really think what made them a super nightmare in 2016 and less so in 2017 was that brutal run-pass balance, not the away-vs-home issue.

We will see in November. It’s an opportunity for the o line and particularly AT Hall to seek redemption in the house of their greatest meltdown.

But yeah, at Oregon and at Husky Stadium are the two biggest worries.

[Snorlax94]

Sigh, I lnow, I know, the even-numbered year road schedule makes the situation tough. But I’d rather take this team over a lesser team with a better home schedule.

And if I got to pick my poison, I’d rather play UW in Seattle without John Ross and Dante Pettis than at home with them. (Vs the nightmare 2016 with Ross, Pettis, McClatcher, in Seattle, with a freshly depleted secondary). I really think what made them a super nightmare in 2016 and less so in 2017 was that brutal run-pass balance, not the away-vs-home issue.

We will see in November. It’s an opportunity for the o line and particularly AT Hall to seek redemption in the house of their greatest meltdown.

But yeah, at Oregon and at Husky Stadium are the two biggest worries.

[pcgoode]

As much I would love the Cardinal to make it into the CFP, I won't be upset if they don't.  The disparity in scheduling between conferences like the PAC12 on the one hand and conferences like the SEC on the other is just too great to compare apples to apples when it comes to deciding who gets in.  I don't buy that the playoff committee gives enough weight to strength of schedule.

Look at the schedule Stanford plays this year vs the one that Alabama has coming.

Stanford: nine conference games, six true road games, no neutral site games, six home games, and an FCS opponent in week three.  Four opponents in ESPN preseason FPI top 25 (one at home, three on the road).

Alabama: eight conference games, four true road games, one neutral site game, seven home games, and an FCS opponent the second last week of the season. Two opponents in ESPN preseason FPI top 25 (both home games).

[pcgoode]

As much I would love the Cardinal to make it into the CFP, I won't be upset if they don't.  The disparity in scheduling between conferences like the PAC12 on the one hand and conferences like the SEC on the other is just too great to compare apples to apples when it comes to deciding who gets in.  I don't buy that the playoff committee gives enough weight to strength of schedule.

Look at the schedule Stanford plays this year vs the one that Alabama has coming.

Stanford: nine conference games, six true road games, no neutral site games, six home games, and an FCS opponent in week three.  Four opponents in ESPN preseason FPI top 25 (one at home, three on the road).

Alabama: eight conference games, four true road games, one neutral site game, seven home games, and an FCS opponent the second last week of the season. Two opponents in ESPN preseason FPI top 25 (both home games).

[wallendar]

As much I would love the Cardinal to make it into the CFP, I won't be upset if they don't.  The disparity in scheduling between conferences like the PAC12 on the one hand and conferences like the SEC on the other is just too great to compare apples to apples when it comes to deciding who gets in.  I don't buy that the playoff committee gives enough weight to strength of schedule.

Look at the schedule Stanford plays this year vs the one that Alabama has coming.

Stanford: nine conference games, six true road games, no neutral site games, six home games, and an FCS opponent in week three.  Four opponents in ESPN preseason FPI top 25 (one at home, three on the road).

Alabama: eight conference games, four true road games, one neutral site game, seven home games, and an FCS opponent the second last week of the season. Two opponents in ESPN preseason FPI top 25 (both home games).

Let’s face it - the P12 leadership doesn’t take football seriously.  If they did, they would permit teams to schedule FCS games in November.  They would create a conference schedule that maximizes the chances of the premier teams in the league to win.  And they would review the unbalanced structure of inter-divisional games to ensure equity.  In essence, they cut off their nose to spite their face.

---

It is interesting that you noted 2011 and 2015 as special opportunities because both featured the odd-year schedule.  One of the problems this year is the even-year slate.  It could be the difference between a special year and a darn good one....

Agreed.  Washington State getting better makes the home slate a little less awful, but that road slate is still just brutal.  Oregon dipping a bit doesn't move the needle because Washington has gotten better.  And Chip Kelly will make that UCLA game tougher than it was under Mora.  

On the bright side, taking just one loss on that schedule might be enough for the playoff.

One loss (as long as it is not in the championship game) will be enough.  To quote a famous starship captain —-  Make it so!

[wallendar]

As much I would love the Cardinal to make it into the CFP, I won't be upset if they don't.  The disparity in scheduling between conferences like the PAC12 on the one hand and conferences like the SEC on the other is just too great to compare apples to apples when it comes to deciding who gets in.  I don't buy that the playoff committee gives enough weight to strength of schedule.

Look at the schedule Stanford plays this year vs the one that Alabama has coming.

Stanford: nine conference games, six true road games, no neutral site games, six home games, and an FCS opponent in week three.  Four opponents in ESPN preseason FPI top 25 (one at home, three on the road).

Alabama: eight conference games, four true road games, one neutral site game, seven home games, and an FCS opponent the second last week of the season. Two opponents in ESPN preseason FPI top 25 (both home games).

Let’s face it - the P12 leadership doesn’t take football seriously.  If they did, they would permit teams to schedule FCS games in November.  They would create a conference schedule that maximizes the chances of the premier teams in the league to win.  And they would review the unbalanced structure of inter-divisional games to ensure equity.  In essence, they cut off their nose to spite their face.

---

It is interesting that you noted 2011 and 2015 as special opportunities because both featured the odd-year schedule.  One of the problems this year is the even-year slate.  It could be the difference between a special year and a darn good one....

Agreed.  Washington State getting better makes the home slate a little less awful, but that road slate is still just brutal.  Oregon dipping a bit doesn't move the needle because Washington has gotten better.  And Chip Kelly will make that UCLA game tougher than it was under Mora.  

On the bright side, taking just one loss on that schedule might be enough for the playoff.

One loss (as long as it is not in the championship game) will be enough.  To quote a famous starship captain —-  Make it so!

[Goose]

Let’s face it - the P12 leadership doesn’t take football seriously.  If they did, they would permit teams to schedule FCS games in November.  They would create a conference schedule that maximizes the chances of the premier teams in the league to win.  And they would review the unbalanced structure of inter-divisional games to ensure equity.  In essence, they cut off their nose to spite their face.

---

This subject has been beat to death on the board many times. While it may be true that the "P12 leadership" isn't doing everything that they could to produce a "chosen champion" every year, it is also certainly true that schools like Stanford constantly upset the apple cart by wanting to schedule teams that are actually good. We also insist on playing UCLA and USC every year, which usually means playing one really good team, and probably two in the near future. That isn't the P12. That is us. FWIW, I hope that remains true. Yes, it would be easier to play Southern Utah State than to play USC, but we don't want to do that.

[Goose]

Let’s face it - the P12 leadership doesn’t take football seriously.  If they did, they would permit teams to schedule FCS games in November.  They would create a conference schedule that maximizes the chances of the premier teams in the league to win.  And they would review the unbalanced structure of inter-divisional games to ensure equity.  In essence, they cut off their nose to spite their face.

---

This subject has been beat to death on the board many times. While it may be true that the "P12 leadership" isn't doing everything that they could to produce a "chosen champion" every year, it is also certainly true that schools like Stanford constantly upset the apple cart by wanting to schedule teams that are actually good. We also insist on playing UCLA and USC every year, which usually means playing one really good team, and probably two in the near future. That isn't the P12. That is us. FWIW, I hope that remains true. Yes, it would be easier to play Southern Utah State than to play USC, but we don't want to do that.

[OutsiderFan]

Guys, keep in mind the National Championship Game is at Levi's Stadium.  That should be a fantastic reason for Stanford fans to root like hell for a playoff berth this season.

[OutsiderFan]

Guys, keep in mind the National Championship Game is at Levi's Stadium.  That should be a fantastic reason for Stanford fans to root like hell for a playoff berth this season.

[wallendar]

Let’s face it - the P12 leadership doesn’t take football seriously.  If they did, they would permit teams to schedule FCS games in November.  They would create a conference schedule that maximizes the chances of the premier teams in the league to win.  And they would review the unbalanced structure of inter-divisional games to ensure equity.  In essence, they cut off their nose to spite their face.

---

This subject has been beat to death on the board many times. While it may be true that the "P12 leadership" isn't doing everything that they could to produce a "chosen champion" every year, it is also certainly true that schools like Stanford constantly upset the apple cart by wanting to schedule teams that are actually good. We also insist on playing UCLA and USC every year, which usually means playing one really good team, and probably two in the near future. That isn't the P12. That is us. FWIW, I hope that remains true. Yes, it would be easier to play Southern Utah State than to play USC, but we don't want to do that.

I’m not talking about playing USC instead of So. Utah.  Stanford already has Davis on the schedule and you can only schedule one FCS school per year.  I’m talking about when you play a particular opponent not who you play.

[wallendar]

Let’s face it - the P12 leadership doesn’t take football seriously.  If they did, they would permit teams to schedule FCS games in November.  They would create a conference schedule that maximizes the chances of the premier teams in the league to win.  And they would review the unbalanced structure of inter-divisional games to ensure equity.  In essence, they cut off their nose to spite their face.

---

This subject has been beat to death on the board many times. While it may be true that the "P12 leadership" isn't doing everything that they could to produce a "chosen champion" every year, it is also certainly true that schools like Stanford constantly upset the apple cart by wanting to schedule teams that are actually good. We also insist on playing UCLA and USC every year, which usually means playing one really good team, and probably two in the near future. That isn't the P12. That is us. FWIW, I hope that remains true. Yes, it would be easier to play Southern Utah State than to play USC, but we don't want to do that.

I’m not talking about playing USC instead of So. Utah.  Stanford already has Davis on the schedule and you can only schedule one FCS school per year.  I’m talking about when you play a particular opponent not who you play.

[CornFed]

Just saw at a sports book in Las Vegas that Stanford winning the national championship is at 40:1 odds.  How can one pass that up?  Not me baby!!

Good thing I passed it up.  It's 60:1 at another sports book.  ?

[CornFed]

Just saw at a sports book in Las Vegas that Stanford winning the national championship is at 40:1 odds.  How can one pass that up?  Not me baby!!

Good thing I passed it up.  It's 60:1 at another sports book.  ?

[Goose]

I’m not talking about playing USC instead of So. Utah.  Stanford already has Davis on the schedule and you can only schedule one FCS school per year.  I’m talking about when you play a particular opponent not who you play.

OK, fair enough. However, as has been discussed at length, if both Stanford and USC insist on playing ND, it creates "fixed points" in the time schedule, because ND wants to play late in the year on the west coast. That basically precludes "spacing" the games for the contending teams arbitrarily. It is certainly true that two years ago there were some really bad short week teams against teams coming off a bye. That kind of thing can be mitigated, and basically has been.
      As I see it, the problem isn't the "when" of the schedule. That is a second-order problem. The first problem is that the PAC12 plays one more conference game, which makes a real difference in both the probability of getting beat by a "lesser" team and in the ability to "spread out" the clearly competitive games. The second problem is that some schools, particularly USC and Stanford, have other schedule constrains/desires that limits scheduling options. Given that we probably don't want to change those things, it is not probable a "better" schedule can be reliably created.

[Goose]

I’m not talking about playing USC instead of So. Utah.  Stanford already has Davis on the schedule and you can only schedule one FCS school per year.  I’m talking about when you play a particular opponent not who you play.

OK, fair enough. However, as has been discussed at length, if both Stanford and USC insist on playing ND, it creates "fixed points" in the time schedule, because ND wants to play late in the year on the west coast. That basically precludes "spacing" the games for the contending teams arbitrarily. It is certainly true that two years ago there were some really bad short week teams against teams coming off a bye. That kind of thing can be mitigated, and basically has been.
      As I see it, the problem isn't the "when" of the schedule. That is a second-order problem. The first problem is that the PAC12 plays one more conference game, which makes a real difference in both the probability of getting beat by a "lesser" team and in the ability to "spread out" the clearly competitive games. The second problem is that some schools, particularly USC and Stanford, have other schedule constrains/desires that limits scheduling options. Given that we probably don't want to change those things, it is not probable a "better" schedule can be reliably created.

[CowboyIndian]

As I see it, the problem isn't the "when" of the schedule. That is a second-order problem. The first problem is that the PAC12 plays one more conference game, which makes a real difference in both the probability of getting beat by a "lesser" team and in the ability to "spread out" the clearly competitive games. The second problem is that some schools, particularly USC and Stanford, have other schedule constrains/desires that limits scheduling options. Given that we probably don't want to change those things, it is not probable a "better" schedule can be reliably created.

If getting to the playoff is a goal of the conference, university presidents and ADs should be raising holy hell about the 8-game conference schedules in the ACC and $EC. It is an enormous advantage.

[CowboyIndian]

As I see it, the problem isn't the "when" of the schedule. That is a second-order problem. The first problem is that the PAC12 plays one more conference game, which makes a real difference in both the probability of getting beat by a "lesser" team and in the ability to "spread out" the clearly competitive games. The second problem is that some schools, particularly USC and Stanford, have other schedule constrains/desires that limits scheduling options. Given that we probably don't want to change those things, it is not probable a "better" schedule can be reliably created.

If getting to the playoff is a goal of the conference, university presidents and ADs should be raising holy hell about the 8-game conference schedules in the ACC and $EC. It is an enormous advantage.

[Goose]

If getting to the playoff is a goal of the conference, university presidents and ADs should be raising holy hell about the 8-game conference schedules in the ACC and $EC. It is an enormous advantage.

Absolutely agree. Since SEC football is so great, imagine how much money they can make having another really competitive game each year instead of a cupcake. [sarcasm] No reason they won't want to do so. [/sarcasm]

[Goose]

If getting to the playoff is a goal of the conference, university presidents and ADs should be raising holy hell about the 8-game conference schedules in the ACC and $EC. It is an enormous advantage.

Absolutely agree. Since SEC football is so great, imagine how much money they can make having another really competitive game each year instead of a cupcake. [sarcasm] No reason they won't want to do so. [/sarcasm]