[pcgoode]

From RJ. If you believe it’s largely about the Jimmys and Joes rather than the Xs and Os:

For funsies, here is how Stanford and Kansas State match up based @247Sports Class Rankings:

Kansas State (Class Rank)
'17 (61)
'18 (66)
'19 (63)
'20 (52)
'21 (56)

Stanford
'17 (14)
'18 (40)
'19 (19)
'20 (21)
'21 (42)

[pcgoode]

From RJ. If you believe it’s largely about the Jimmys and Joes rather than the Xs and Os:

For funsies, here is how Stanford and Kansas State match up based @247Sports Class Rankings:

Kansas State (Class Rank)
'17 (61)
'18 (66)
'19 (63)
'20 (52)
'21 (56)

Stanford
'17 (14)
'18 (40)
'19 (19)
'20 (21)
'21 (42)

[82lsju]

From RJ. If you believe it’s largely about the Jimmys and Joes rather than the Xs and Os:

For funsies, here is how Stanford and Kansas State match up based @247Sports Class Rankings:

Kansas State (Class Rank)
'17 (61)
'18 (66)
'19 (63)
'20 (52)
'21 (56)

Stanford
'17 (14)
'18 (40)
'19 (19)
'20 (21)
'21 (42)

of course this doesn't include the new secondary recruiting of transfers where we don't see many coming our way.....

[82lsju]

From RJ. If you believe it’s largely about the Jimmys and Joes rather than the Xs and Os:

For funsies, here is how Stanford and Kansas State match up based @247Sports Class Rankings:

Kansas State (Class Rank)
'17 (61)
'18 (66)
'19 (63)
'20 (52)
'21 (56)

Stanford
'17 (14)
'18 (40)
'19 (19)
'20 (21)
'21 (42)

of course this doesn't include the new secondary recruiting of transfers where we don't see many coming our way.....

[george]

[By the way, is there an official prediction contest this year, or just a thread for our amusement?]

Yes, there is -- looks like you haven't filled in the widget yet?

https://thecardboard.org/board/predictions.php

[george]

[By the way, is there an official prediction contest this year, or just a thread for our amusement?]

Yes, there is -- looks like you haven't filled in the widget yet?

https://thecardboard.org/board/predictions.php

[BostonCard]

p.s. I don't think the 2012 offense is a particularly good parallel to the 2019 defense.
In 2012, the offense was coming off one of the best years in Stanford history. Lost a bunch of talent from that team, including a QB they had trouble replacing. In the end, the 2012 offense finished #30 in the country in points per drive - a season average and it was better than that after Hogan.

The 2019 defense was following a fairly bad 2018 defense. It got worse, but not drastically so. [It ranked better within the conference in yds allowed per game, but worse in absolute yds; ppd allowed from 1.98 to 2.64] It didn't rely on one position like the offense on QB, and didn't get better at the end of the season by making strides at that one position.



On the other hand, both prompted lots of whining on message boards - they have that in common.

I was comparing the 2021 defense to the 2019 defense.

BC

[BostonCard]

p.s. I don't think the 2012 offense is a particularly good parallel to the 2019 defense.
In 2012, the offense was coming off one of the best years in Stanford history. Lost a bunch of talent from that team, including a QB they had trouble replacing. In the end, the 2012 offense finished #30 in the country in points per drive - a season average and it was better than that after Hogan.

The 2019 defense was following a fairly bad 2018 defense. It got worse, but not drastically so. [It ranked better within the conference in yds allowed per game, but worse in absolute yds; ppd allowed from 1.98 to 2.64] It didn't rely on one position like the offense on QB, and didn't get better at the end of the season by making strides at that one position.



On the other hand, both prompted lots of whining on message boards - they have that in common.

I was comparing the 2021 defense to the 2019 defense.

BC

[BostonCard]

I have the shame so far, but I have no confidence in our defense, and our offense will feature a QB with at most two starts.  Plus we are playing a morning game in central time.  All of which is a recipe for a tough outing for Stanford.

BC

Defense didn’t do as badly as I had feared; the offense stunk it up, but not on the way I expected.  Lack of a running game is a big concern.

BC

[BostonCard]

I have the shame so far, but I have no confidence in our defense, and our offense will feature a QB with at most two starts.  Plus we are playing a morning game in central time.  All of which is a recipe for a tough outing for Stanford.

BC

Defense didn’t do as badly as I had feared; the offense stunk it up, but not on the way I expected.  Lack of a running game is a big concern.

BC

[Mick]

I'm going to reserve judgment.  This was a 9 a.m. body clock game, and I think it impacted Stanford players pretty hard.

[Mick]

I'm going to reserve judgment.  This was a 9 a.m. body clock game, and I think it impacted Stanford players pretty hard.

[Maple Leaf]

I'm going to reserve judgment.  This was a 9 a.m. body clock game, and I think it impacted Stanford players pretty hard.

Oregon plays Ohio State at 9 AM Pacific time, if the quackies can give the buckies a hard close game then the early start time impact concept may need to be reassessed.

[Maple Leaf]

I'm going to reserve judgment.  This was a 9 a.m. body clock game, and I think it impacted Stanford players pretty hard.

Oregon plays Ohio State at 9 AM Pacific time, if the quackies can give the buckies a hard close game then the early start time impact concept may need to be reassessed.

[Mick]

I'm going to reserve judgment.  This was a 9 a.m. body clock game, and I think it impacted Stanford players pretty hard.

Oregon plays Ohio State at 9 AM Pacific time, if the quackies can give the buckies a hard close game then the early start time impact concept may need to be reassessed.

I think back to playing Texas away and home in back to back years, getting crushed by Texas 69-17 in Austin in a very early game in 1999 (QB was Husak), then playing a late night game in 2000 against #5 Texas in Stanford one year later and coming away with a 27-24 win (QBs were Fasani and Lewis).  Texas QB Major Applewhite called it a bizarre game.  Yeah...cuz your entire team was wiped out tired that late at night.

Add in the fact that David Shaw complained long and loud about it, particularly about the players having to get up at 6 a.m. body clock time, and I'm going to say...yes, it's a problem.

Incidentally, the week after Stanford lost to Texas 69-17, they came back to beat Washington State 54-17 and went to the Rose Bowl.

[Mick]

I'm going to reserve judgment.  This was a 9 a.m. body clock game, and I think it impacted Stanford players pretty hard.

Oregon plays Ohio State at 9 AM Pacific time, if the quackies can give the buckies a hard close game then the early start time impact concept may need to be reassessed.

I think back to playing Texas away and home in back to back years, getting crushed by Texas 69-17 in Austin in a very early game in 1999 (QB was Husak), then playing a late night game in 2000 against #5 Texas in Stanford one year later and coming away with a 27-24 win (QBs were Fasani and Lewis).  Texas QB Major Applewhite called it a bizarre game.  Yeah...cuz your entire team was wiped out tired that late at night.

Add in the fact that David Shaw complained long and loud about it, particularly about the players having to get up at 6 a.m. body clock time, and I'm going to say...yes, it's a problem.

Incidentally, the week after Stanford lost to Texas 69-17, they came back to beat Washington State 54-17 and went to the Rose Bowl.