(10-02-2021, 06:40 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(10-02-2021, 05:45 PM)French Rage Wrote: [sarcasm]At least the Duck fans on Facebook are handling it with their usual class.[/sarcasm]
They are quite bitter about the officiating. Obviously the refs were intimidated by the boisterous home crowd.
(10-02-2021, 06:40 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(10-02-2021, 05:45 PM)French Rage Wrote: [sarcasm]At least the Duck fans on Facebook are handling it with their usual class.[/sarcasm]
They are quite bitter about the officiating. Obviously the refs were intimidated by the boisterous home crowd.
(10-03-2021, 06:08 AM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(10-02-2021, 06:40 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(10-02-2021, 05:45 PM)French Rage Wrote: [sarcasm]At least the Duck fans on Facebook are handling it with their usual class.[/sarcasm]
They are quite bitter about the officiating. Obviously the refs were intimidated by the boisterous home crowd.
Has there ever been a close football game where the losing team's fans didn't complain about the officiating? If there has I've missed it.
(10-03-2021, 06:08 AM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(10-02-2021, 06:40 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(10-02-2021, 05:45 PM)French Rage Wrote: [sarcasm]At least the Duck fans on Facebook are handling it with their usual class.[/sarcasm]
They are quite bitter about the officiating. Obviously the refs were intimidated by the boisterous home crowd.
Has there ever been a close football game where the losing team's fans didn't complain about the officiating? If there has I've missed it.
(10-02-2021, 09:43 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(10-02-2021, 08:51 PM)Mick Wrote: That was Stanford’s fourth overtime win against the Ducks, and their fourth win against an Oregon team ranked in the Top 10 since 2009.
We heard on ABC that Stanford is now 4-0 in overtime games vs. Oregon. But I think it's only 3-0 - 2012, 2018 and 2021. Am I missing another OT game? I don't see it in this series history.
https://gostanford.com/sports/football/o...regon/3170
I'll add that Oregon blew a 4th quarter lead Stanford overcame a 4th quarter deficit in each of those games.
(10-02-2021, 09:43 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(10-02-2021, 08:51 PM)Mick Wrote: That was Stanford’s fourth overtime win against the Ducks, and their fourth win against an Oregon team ranked in the Top 10 since 2009.
We heard on ABC that Stanford is now 4-0 in overtime games vs. Oregon. But I think it's only 3-0 - 2012, 2018 and 2021. Am I missing another OT game? I don't see it in this series history.
https://gostanford.com/sports/football/o...regon/3170
I'll add that Oregon blew a 4th quarter lead Stanford overcame a 4th quarter deficit in each of those games.
(10-03-2021, 07:26 AM)terry Wrote:(10-02-2021, 09:43 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(10-02-2021, 08:51 PM)Mick Wrote: That was Stanford’s fourth overtime win against the Ducks, and their fourth win against an Oregon team ranked in the Top 10 since 2009.
We heard on ABC that Stanford is now 4-0 in overtime games vs. Oregon. But I think it's only 3-0 - 2012, 2018 and 2021. Am I missing another OT game? I don't see it in this series history.
https://gostanford.com/sports/football/o...regon/3170
I'll add that Oregon blew a 4th quarter lead Stanford overcame a 4th quarter deficit in each of those games.
Stanford defeated Oregon in overtime in 1996, 27-24.
Stanford trailed by 10 points in the 4th quarter, 24-14. Stanford cut the deficit to 3 points on a 27 yard TD pass from Chad Hutchinson to Damon Dunn with 8 minutes remaining. Stanford tied the game on a 25 yard field goal by Kevin Miller with 50 seconds left. The tying FG was set up by a 49 yard Hutchinson-to-Dunn completion on 4th and 12.
In overtime, Oregon had the ball first. The Ducks lost a fumble on a sack by Kailee Wong. On Stanford's possession, Kevin Miller made a 27 yard FG to win the game. All right now!
That was the first overtime game in Stanford history.
(10-03-2021, 07:26 AM)terry Wrote:(10-02-2021, 09:43 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(10-02-2021, 08:51 PM)Mick Wrote: That was Stanford’s fourth overtime win against the Ducks, and their fourth win against an Oregon team ranked in the Top 10 since 2009.
We heard on ABC that Stanford is now 4-0 in overtime games vs. Oregon. But I think it's only 3-0 - 2012, 2018 and 2021. Am I missing another OT game? I don't see it in this series history.
https://gostanford.com/sports/football/o...regon/3170
I'll add that Oregon blew a 4th quarter lead Stanford overcame a 4th quarter deficit in each of those games.
Stanford defeated Oregon in overtime in 1996, 27-24.
Stanford trailed by 10 points in the 4th quarter, 24-14. Stanford cut the deficit to 3 points on a 27 yard TD pass from Chad Hutchinson to Damon Dunn with 8 minutes remaining. Stanford tied the game on a 25 yard field goal by Kevin Miller with 50 seconds left. The tying FG was set up by a 49 yard Hutchinson-to-Dunn completion on 4th and 12.
In overtime, Oregon had the ball first. The Ducks lost a fumble on a sack by Kailee Wong. On Stanford's possession, Kevin Miller made a 27 yard FG to win the game. All right now!
That was the first overtime game in Stanford history.
(10-03-2021, 05:31 AM)French Rage Wrote: That's always going to be called on a play like that. Tough titties, Ducks.You hope. With PAC-12 refs, it is not for sure. It is always unwise to rely on the officials getting it right, especially in the PAC-12. IMHO the refs were letting way, way too much go on the end zone passes. On the third down play our receiver clearly pushed off, but that was because he was being held. The DBs were trying to hold the receivers arms down so they couldn't go get the ball well before the passes were even thrown. No calls. Both players have a right to go far the ball, but what happens before that matters too.
(10-03-2021, 05:31 AM)French Rage Wrote: That's always going to be called on a play like that. Tough titties, Ducks.You hope. With PAC-12 refs, it is not for sure. It is always unwise to rely on the officials getting it right, especially in the PAC-12. IMHO the refs were letting way, way too much go on the end zone passes. On the third down play our receiver clearly pushed off, but that was because he was being held. The DBs were trying to hold the receivers arms down so they couldn't go get the ball well before the passes were even thrown. No calls. Both players have a right to go far the ball, but what happens before that matters too.
(10-03-2021, 08:41 AM)paloalto Wrote: Big football win. Optimism about WBB recruiting. Is Stanford becoming a jock school? Should Stanford expect a call from the SEC to join their conference?
I picked Oregon to win. I felt an unranked team probably won't beat the #3 team ranked team in the country. I'm going to stop playing the prediction thread. I much more enjoy Stanford winning than being correct if I pick the opponent. I also feel bad for Oregon fans; from dreams about an NC to getting beat by Stanford. They must be feeling pretty low right now.
(10-03-2021, 08:41 AM)paloalto Wrote: Big football win. Optimism about WBB recruiting. Is Stanford becoming a jock school? Should Stanford expect a call from the SEC to join their conference?
I picked Oregon to win. I felt an unranked team probably won't beat the #3 team ranked team in the country. I'm going to stop playing the prediction thread. I much more enjoy Stanford winning than being correct if I pick the opponent. I also feel bad for Oregon fans; from dreams about an NC to getting beat by Stanford. They must be feeling pretty low right now.
(10-03-2021, 09:17 AM)CTcard Wrote:(10-03-2021, 08:41 AM)paloalto Wrote: Is Stanford becoming a jock school?
Stanford has been a jock school for a long time. It’s just that football fortunes have been hit and miss in modern times.
(10-03-2021, 09:17 AM)CTcard Wrote:(10-03-2021, 08:41 AM)paloalto Wrote: Is Stanford becoming a jock school?
Stanford has been a jock school for a long time. It’s just that football fortunes have been hit and miss in modern times.
(10-02-2021, 10:55 PM)bl82 Wrote: Oregon was cheap and dirty the entire game. That blindside helmet to helmet decapitation of Gilman should have been an ejection. There was another play in which someone went out of bounds and after the play was dead an Oregon player literally lifted a Stanford player off the ground and body slammed him. No flag! There were several other blatant examples.
And it’s been this way ever since they cold-cocked Owusu in Eugene.
(10-02-2021, 10:55 PM)bl82 Wrote: Oregon was cheap and dirty the entire game. That blindside helmet to helmet decapitation of Gilman should have been an ejection. There was another play in which someone went out of bounds and after the play was dead an Oregon player literally lifted a Stanford player off the ground and body slammed him. No flag! There were several other blatant examples.
And it’s been this way ever since they cold-cocked Owusu in Eugene.
(10-03-2021, 09:40 AM)Austroturf Wrote:(10-03-2021, 09:17 AM)CTcard Wrote:(10-03-2021, 08:41 AM)paloalto Wrote: Is Stanford becoming a jock school?
Stanford has been a jock school for a long time. It’s just that football fortunes have been hit and miss in modern times.
True. Stanford has had a virtual lock on the annual NACDA Director's Cup and got nudged out of first place by Texas last year in the Covid-truncated year for the first time in a quarter century. It's probably safer to say that Stanford is a university with high academics that has also chosen to excel in a broad array of sports.
(10-03-2021, 09:40 AM)Austroturf Wrote:(10-03-2021, 09:17 AM)CTcard Wrote:(10-03-2021, 08:41 AM)paloalto Wrote: Is Stanford becoming a jock school?
Stanford has been a jock school for a long time. It’s just that football fortunes have been hit and miss in modern times.
True. Stanford has had a virtual lock on the annual NACDA Director's Cup and got nudged out of first place by Texas last year in the Covid-truncated year for the first time in a quarter century. It's probably safer to say that Stanford is a university with high academics that has also chosen to excel in a broad array of sports.
(10-03-2021, 10:06 AM)scorecard Wrote:(10-02-2021, 10:55 PM)bl82 Wrote: Oregon was cheap and dirty the entire game. That blindside helmet to helmet decapitation of Gilman should have been an ejection. There was another play in which someone went out of bounds and after the play was dead an Oregon player literally lifted a Stanford player off the ground and body slammed him. No flag! There were several other blatant examples.
And it’s been this way ever since they cold-cocked Owusu in Eugene.
Interestingly, the Oregon player (Jaylon Redd) who took the cheap shot on Gilman was the same player who Gilman could have targeted in OT (but didn't). Gilman could have lowered the helmet for a cheap shot but thankfully didn't.
The Ducks missed their tallest cornerback, Trikweze Bridges 6'3", who was ejected for targeting on the first kickoff. They did not miss games from 2 of their other cornerbacks, DJ James (starter) and Jamal Hill, who were reinstated after missing only the first game of the season after they faced three charges of assault, disorderly conduct, reckless endangering and unlawful discharge of a firearm related to driving around downtown Eugene and shooting people with airsoft guns. Most of the charges were eventually dropped and they entered a court diversion program. Elijah Higgins caught the tying fade pass in regulation over DJ James.
The player who threw John Humphreys after the play was dead was Dontae Manning, the Ducks' 5 star freshman cornerback. Humphreys was probably holding on the play, but was surprised this didn't draw a penalty because Humphreys went flying and body whipped another Ducks player. Manning was also the player who hit Tremayne low from behind causing his gruesome injury. It's fitting that Humphreys pinballed his way through seemingly their entire secondary to score the winning touchdown.
Sometimes we as fans bemoan admissions and not being able to get players into school, but I prefer being proud of the team and what they represent.
(10-03-2021, 10:06 AM)scorecard Wrote:(10-02-2021, 10:55 PM)bl82 Wrote: Oregon was cheap and dirty the entire game. That blindside helmet to helmet decapitation of Gilman should have been an ejection. There was another play in which someone went out of bounds and after the play was dead an Oregon player literally lifted a Stanford player off the ground and body slammed him. No flag! There were several other blatant examples.
And it’s been this way ever since they cold-cocked Owusu in Eugene.
Interestingly, the Oregon player (Jaylon Redd) who took the cheap shot on Gilman was the same player who Gilman could have targeted in OT (but didn't). Gilman could have lowered the helmet for a cheap shot but thankfully didn't.
The Ducks missed their tallest cornerback, Trikweze Bridges 6'3", who was ejected for targeting on the first kickoff. They did not miss games from 2 of their other cornerbacks, DJ James (starter) and Jamal Hill, who were reinstated after missing only the first game of the season after they faced three charges of assault, disorderly conduct, reckless endangering and unlawful discharge of a firearm related to driving around downtown Eugene and shooting people with airsoft guns. Most of the charges were eventually dropped and they entered a court diversion program. Elijah Higgins caught the tying fade pass in regulation over DJ James.
The player who threw John Humphreys after the play was dead was Dontae Manning, the Ducks' 5 star freshman cornerback. Humphreys was probably holding on the play, but was surprised this didn't draw a penalty because Humphreys went flying and body whipped another Ducks player. Manning was also the player who hit Tremayne low from behind causing his gruesome injury. It's fitting that Humphreys pinballed his way through seemingly their entire secondary to score the winning touchdown.
Sometimes we as fans bemoan admissions and not being able to get players into school, but I prefer being proud of the team and what they represent.
(10-03-2021, 05:34 AM)Eucalyptus72 Wrote:(10-02-2021, 03:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Flemming with the acute observation that we basically have no defensive line depth...
Would help if we recruited a few more.
BC
Stanford probably loses, arguably, their best four DL position players after this year. I guess possibly Pakola returns and Armitage develops but they could be as thin as ever next year.
(10-03-2021, 05:34 AM)Eucalyptus72 Wrote:(10-02-2021, 03:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Flemming with the acute observation that we basically have no defensive line depth...
Would help if we recruited a few more.
BC
Stanford probably loses, arguably, their best four DL position players after this year. I guess possibly Pakola returns and Armitage develops but they could be as thin as ever next year.
(10-03-2021, 11:18 AM)old spanish trail Wrote:(10-03-2021, 05:34 AM)Eucalyptus72 Wrote:(10-02-2021, 03:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Flemming with the acute observation that we basically have no defensive line depth...
Would help if we recruited a few more.
BC
Stanford probably loses, arguably, their best four DL position players after this year. I guess possibly Pakola returns and Armitage develops but they could be as thin as ever next year.
If, as reported and evidence seems to prove out, current DL coach doesn't like to recruit and Stanford won't deep six him, they should make Aziz Shittu an offer he can't refuse as the Asst DL coach. He's recruiting up a storm for Colorado. And, he loves Stanford and has the story to connect with defensive linemen.
(10-03-2021, 11:18 AM)old spanish trail Wrote:(10-03-2021, 05:34 AM)Eucalyptus72 Wrote:(10-02-2021, 03:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Flemming with the acute observation that we basically have no defensive line depth...
Would help if we recruited a few more.
BC
Stanford probably loses, arguably, their best four DL position players after this year. I guess possibly Pakola returns and Armitage develops but they could be as thin as ever next year.
If, as reported and evidence seems to prove out, current DL coach doesn't like to recruit and Stanford won't deep six him, they should make Aziz Shittu an offer he can't refuse as the Asst DL coach. He's recruiting up a storm for Colorado. And, he loves Stanford and has the story to connect with defensive linemen.
(10-03-2021, 11:53 AM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(10-03-2021, 11:18 AM)old spanish trail Wrote:(10-03-2021, 05:34 AM)Eucalyptus72 Wrote:(10-02-2021, 03:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Flemming with the acute observation that we basically have no defensive line depth...
Would help if we recruited a few more.
BC
Stanford probably loses, arguably, their best four DL position players after this year. I guess possibly Pakola returns and Armitage develops but they could be as thin as ever next year.
If, as reported and evidence seems to prove out, current DL coach doesn't like to recruit and Stanford won't deep six him, they should make Aziz Shittu an offer he can't refuse as the Asst DL coach. He's recruiting up a storm for Colorado. And, he loves Stanford and has the story to connect with defensive linemen.
Well, our highest ranked commit for 2022 is a DL and he had offers from Ohio State, Alabama, and Notre Dame (among many others). So someone did a pretty good job on him.
(10-03-2021, 11:53 AM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(10-03-2021, 11:18 AM)old spanish trail Wrote:(10-03-2021, 05:34 AM)Eucalyptus72 Wrote:(10-02-2021, 03:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Flemming with the acute observation that we basically have no defensive line depth...
Would help if we recruited a few more.
BC
Stanford probably loses, arguably, their best four DL position players after this year. I guess possibly Pakola returns and Armitage develops but they could be as thin as ever next year.
If, as reported and evidence seems to prove out, current DL coach doesn't like to recruit and Stanford won't deep six him, they should make Aziz Shittu an offer he can't refuse as the Asst DL coach. He's recruiting up a storm for Colorado. And, he loves Stanford and has the story to connect with defensive linemen.
Well, our highest ranked commit for 2022 is a DL and he had offers from Ohio State, Alabama, and Notre Dame (among many others). So someone did a pretty good job on him.
(10-03-2021, 05:28 AM)CTcard Wrote: - It looks like we're facing a situation this year where good Stanford is quite good and can play with anyone on the schedule, whereas bad Stanford can probably lose to just about anyone on the schedule. At some level that's always true, but it seems more extreme right now.
(10-03-2021, 05:28 AM)CTcard Wrote: - It looks like we're facing a situation this year where good Stanford is quite good and can play with anyone on the schedule, whereas bad Stanford can probably lose to just about anyone on the schedule. At some level that's always true, but it seems more extreme right now.
(10-03-2021, 01:53 PM)Austroturf Wrote:(10-03-2021, 05:28 AM)CTcard Wrote: - It looks like we're facing a situation this year where good Stanford is quite good and can play with anyone on the schedule, whereas bad Stanford can probably lose to just about anyone on the schedule. At some level that's always true, but it seems more extreme right now.
Entirely correct here. The range between "good Stanford" and "bad Stanford" seems to be the widest I have seen in recent years. This 2021 incarnation of Stanford football has the McKee X-factor and a bevy of capable receivers that can be a threat from anywhere on the field. Or this same offense can go 3-and-out 5 times in a row. Likewise, the defense can occasionally stand tall and deny the opponent at the goal line, then give up 240 rushing yards to a team like Vanderbilt.
We have seen two execrable performances this season (Kansas State, UCLA), a workman-like victory against Vanderbilt, a demolition of Troy and a miracle comeback to beat the vaunted #3 Ducks in OT. Has any other team in FBS produced such uneven results in five games?
Years ago, back in the seventies of the previous century, there was a glib anecdote about Stanford football positing that you never knew which Stanford would show up at any given game. The one capable of losing to San Jose State, or the one capable of taking down juggernauts. In fact, the 1971 Rose Bowl champion team managed to lose to San Jose State 13-12 that same year. We seem to have reverted back to that kind of team: giant killers in one game, pathetic losers in the next. It makes for an unpredictable and exciting life as a fan, but it's also a sign of regression from where we were early in the last decade.
Technically, at 2-1, we control our own destiny in the Pac-12 North. But who dares to predict the next 6 conference games (@ASU, @WSU, UW, Utah, @OSU, Cal)? Which Stanford trots onto the field on any given Saturday? Do we take down the newly-ranked Sun Devils in Tempe, then lose to the hapless Cougs in Pullman's Martin Stadium? Each scenario seems plausible at this point. To prove a point, if anyone had told you Stanford would be 3-2 after five games, you would have assumed victories over K-State, UCLA and Vanderbilt and losses to USC and Oregon and would have been wrong on all but one game. What a season so far!
(10-03-2021, 01:53 PM)Austroturf Wrote:(10-03-2021, 05:28 AM)CTcard Wrote: - It looks like we're facing a situation this year where good Stanford is quite good and can play with anyone on the schedule, whereas bad Stanford can probably lose to just about anyone on the schedule. At some level that's always true, but it seems more extreme right now.
Entirely correct here. The range between "good Stanford" and "bad Stanford" seems to be the widest I have seen in recent years. This 2021 incarnation of Stanford football has the McKee X-factor and a bevy of capable receivers that can be a threat from anywhere on the field. Or this same offense can go 3-and-out 5 times in a row. Likewise, the defense can occasionally stand tall and deny the opponent at the goal line, then give up 240 rushing yards to a team like Vanderbilt.
We have seen two execrable performances this season (Kansas State, UCLA), a workman-like victory against Vanderbilt, a demolition of Troy and a miracle comeback to beat the vaunted #3 Ducks in OT. Has any other team in FBS produced such uneven results in five games?
Years ago, back in the seventies of the previous century, there was a glib anecdote about Stanford football positing that you never knew which Stanford would show up at any given game. The one capable of losing to San Jose State, or the one capable of taking down juggernauts. In fact, the 1971 Rose Bowl champion team managed to lose to San Jose State 13-12 that same year. We seem to have reverted back to that kind of team: giant killers in one game, pathetic losers in the next. It makes for an unpredictable and exciting life as a fan, but it's also a sign of regression from where we were early in the last decade.
Technically, at 2-1, we control our own destiny in the Pac-12 North. But who dares to predict the next 6 conference games (@ASU, @WSU, UW, Utah, @OSU, Cal)? Which Stanford trots onto the field on any given Saturday? Do we take down the newly-ranked Sun Devils in Tempe, then lose to the hapless Cougs in Pullman's Martin Stadium? Each scenario seems plausible at this point. To prove a point, if anyone had told you Stanford would be 3-2 after five games, you would have assumed victories over K-State, UCLA and Vanderbilt and losses to USC and Oregon and would have been wrong on all but one game. What a season so far!
(10-03-2021, 02:16 PM)d4cohn Wrote:(10-03-2021, 01:53 PM)Austroturf Wrote:(10-03-2021, 05:28 AM)CTcard Wrote: - It looks like we're facing a situation this year where good Stanford is quite good and can play with anyone on the schedule, whereas bad Stanford can probably lose to just about anyone on the schedule. At some level that's always true, but it seems more extreme right now.
Entirely correct here. The range between "good Stanford" and "bad Stanford" seems to be the widest I have seen in recent years. This 2021 incarnation of Stanford football has the McKee X-factor and a bevy of capable receivers that can be a threat from anywhere on the field. Or this same offense can go 3-and-out 5 times in a row. Likewise, the defense can occasionally stand tall and deny the opponent at the goal line, then give up 240 rushing yards to a team like Vanderbilt.
We have seen two execrable performances this season (Kansas State, UCLA), a workman-like victory against Vanderbilt, a demolition of Troy and a miracle comeback to beat the vaunted #3 Ducks in OT. Has any other team in FBS produced such uneven results in five games?
Years ago, back in the seventies of the previous century, there was a glib anecdote about Stanford football positing that you never knew which Stanford would show up at any given game. The one capable of losing to San Jose State, or the one capable of taking down juggernauts. In fact, the 1971 Rose Bowl champion team managed to lose to San Jose State 13-12 that same year. We seem to have reverted back to that kind of team: giant killers in one game, pathetic losers in the next. It makes for an unpredictable and exciting life as a fan, but it's also a sign of regression from where we were early in the last decade.
Technically, at 2-1, we control our own destiny in the Pac-12 North. But who dares to predict the next 6 conference games (@ASU, @WSU, UW, Utah, @OSU, Cal)? Which Stanford trots onto the field on any given Saturday? Do we take down the newly-ranked Sun Devils in Tempe, then lose to the hapless Cougs in Pullman's Martin Stadium? Each scenario seems plausible at this point. To prove a point, if anyone had told you Stanford would be 3-2 after five games, you would have assumed victories over K-State, UCLA and Vanderbilt and losses to USC and Oregon and would have been wrong on all but one game. What a season so far!
The one factor the past two seasons that affects player availability, which in turn, can contribute to wild swings in team performance, is unique to these seasons and is COVID. Look no further than the false positive tests that Mills and others had, and how the team looked after Mills scraped off the rust against Colorado (we didn't lose the rest of the season).
(10-03-2021, 02:16 PM)d4cohn Wrote:(10-03-2021, 01:53 PM)Austroturf Wrote:(10-03-2021, 05:28 AM)CTcard Wrote: - It looks like we're facing a situation this year where good Stanford is quite good and can play with anyone on the schedule, whereas bad Stanford can probably lose to just about anyone on the schedule. At some level that's always true, but it seems more extreme right now.
Entirely correct here. The range between "good Stanford" and "bad Stanford" seems to be the widest I have seen in recent years. This 2021 incarnation of Stanford football has the McKee X-factor and a bevy of capable receivers that can be a threat from anywhere on the field. Or this same offense can go 3-and-out 5 times in a row. Likewise, the defense can occasionally stand tall and deny the opponent at the goal line, then give up 240 rushing yards to a team like Vanderbilt.
We have seen two execrable performances this season (Kansas State, UCLA), a workman-like victory against Vanderbilt, a demolition of Troy and a miracle comeback to beat the vaunted #3 Ducks in OT. Has any other team in FBS produced such uneven results in five games?
Years ago, back in the seventies of the previous century, there was a glib anecdote about Stanford football positing that you never knew which Stanford would show up at any given game. The one capable of losing to San Jose State, or the one capable of taking down juggernauts. In fact, the 1971 Rose Bowl champion team managed to lose to San Jose State 13-12 that same year. We seem to have reverted back to that kind of team: giant killers in one game, pathetic losers in the next. It makes for an unpredictable and exciting life as a fan, but it's also a sign of regression from where we were early in the last decade.
Technically, at 2-1, we control our own destiny in the Pac-12 North. But who dares to predict the next 6 conference games (@ASU, @WSU, UW, Utah, @OSU, Cal)? Which Stanford trots onto the field on any given Saturday? Do we take down the newly-ranked Sun Devils in Tempe, then lose to the hapless Cougs in Pullman's Martin Stadium? Each scenario seems plausible at this point. To prove a point, if anyone had told you Stanford would be 3-2 after five games, you would have assumed victories over K-State, UCLA and Vanderbilt and losses to USC and Oregon and would have been wrong on all but one game. What a season so far!
The one factor the past two seasons that affects player availability, which in turn, can contribute to wild swings in team performance, is unique to these seasons and is COVID. Look no further than the false positive tests that Mills and others had, and how the team looked after Mills scraped off the rust against Colorado (we didn't lose the rest of the season).
(10-03-2021, 02:19 PM)Austroturf Wrote: That appears to be a valid assertion for 2020, but how have we seen the virus affecting us in 2021? Injuries have been a much bigger issue so far.
(10-03-2021, 02:19 PM)Austroturf Wrote: That appears to be a valid assertion for 2020, but how have we seen the virus affecting us in 2021? Injuries have been a much bigger issue so far.
