The CardBoard
We're #4 - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: We're #4 (/thread-8648.html)


We're #4 - Class_of_75 - 01-13-2015

This USA Today sportswriter takes an early look at the 2015 season and picks tOSU first. Stanford comes in at #4!!! I'll be thrilled if we ended up #4 and in the playoff.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/01/13/early-top-25-2015-college-football-ohio-state-auburn-tcu-oregon-alabama-florida-state/21517063/

Re: We're #4 - Papa John - 01-13-2015

I love reading Paul Myerberg, but his arguments against Stanford being #4 are much stronger than his arguments in favor of the ranking.

He's been doing a preseason ranking of all FBS teams for several years now with a daily countdown that starts with #128 (or whatever is the n for number of teams in the FBS) in early summer and proceeds by one team per day until he reaches number one a day or two before the season kicks off. It will be interesting to see how he feels about Stanford in August.

I do think that, if Kevin Hogan returns, Stanford will be the favorite to win the Pac-12 North.

Re: We're #4 - CTcard - 01-13-2015

(01-13-2015, 01:42 AM)Papa John link Wrote:I do think that, if Kevin Hogan returns, Stanford will be the favorite to win the Pac-12 North.

You seem strangely unconcerned about the defense.

As many as 8 of the 11 guys who started the FF Bowl Game may be gone next year, apparently along with as many as two other projected starters.  We may have to switch to a two man front just to find bodies to put out there.

A lot of the guys coming up would seem to have some talent, so there's hope, but that's a lot different from being highly performing players on a cohesive unit - as we all found out with the OLine this past season.

Re: We're #4 - Ronnietrader - 01-13-2015

ESPN has us unranked in the way to early 2015 rankings.

Re: We're #4 - StanFan88 - 01-13-2015

I will not pay much attention until who's staying & going is settle - both at Stanford and elsewhere.

Re: We're #4 - SeattleTree - 01-13-2015

Not only are the Trees unranked in ESPN's way-too-early Top 25, but ESPN's Pac-12 Blog has the Trees 7th in the conference next season.  Hopefully the team can use that as motivation to prove a few people wrong next season.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12

Re: We're #4 - stupac2 - 01-13-2015

(01-13-2015, 06:35 AM)CTcard link Wrote:You seem strangely unconcerned about the defense.

As many as 8 of the 11 guys who started the FF Bowl Game may be gone next year, apparently along with as many as two other projected starters.  We may have to switch to a two man front just to find bodies to put out there.

A lot of the guys coming up would seem to have some talent, so there's hope, but that's a lot different from being highly performing players on a cohesive unit - as we all found out with the OLine this past season.

I think part of that is that our improvement over the past few years seems to be mostly schematic, the coaches have gotten better about putting guys in the right place to succeed. Plus we've been razor-thin on DL for the last two years and while it definitely cost us somewhat, it's not like our defense sucked.

I think that, given where the program is right now, expecting mild-but-surmountable defensive regression is reasonable, and how well we do next year is basically entirely determined by what you think about our chances on offense.

Re: We're #4 - rudruff - 01-13-2015

We played a lot of guys on D this year that will be back. The competition for time among the back seven should be fierce.

I don't even feel really scared about the DEs. NT is the position that worries me.

The offense seemed to figure a bunch of things out at the end of the season (hopefully it is more than "play bad defenses"). Would be nice to see them push the defense around a bit in the spring game.

Re: We're #4 - yvonne - 01-13-2015

How will we interpret pushing around the defense? It could be that the defense is just worse.

Re: We're #4 - StanFan88 - 01-13-2015

(01-13-2015, 11:52 AM)Yvonne link Wrote:It could be that the defense is just worse.

I wouldn't say worse, I would say "not as dominating" - after the way they played this season, there's bound to be dropoff but they aren't going to be bad.

Re: We're #4 - Papa John - 01-13-2015

(01-13-2015, 08:44 AM)SeattleTree link Wrote:Not only are the Trees unranked in ESPN's way-too-early Top 25, but ESPN's Pac-12 Blog has the Trees 7th in the conference next season.  Hopefully the team can use that as motivation to prove a few people wrong next season.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12

That ranking was for the recently completed season. And perfectly reasonable in my opinion.

Do I have concerns about the defense for next season, CTcard? Of course I do. But consider the inexperience or lack of proven talent at offense and defense for the rest of the Pac-12 North.  I also think the conference schedule lays out favorably for Stanford next year. In 2015 we have five--as opposed to four this past year--conference games at home: UA, UCLA, UW, Oregon and C.al. Just as importantly, three of our four conference road games are against teams that were in the lower tier of the conference in 2014: OSU, WSU and CU. U$C at the Coliseum will be a tough game to win, of course.

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect Stanford to finish, say, 7-2 and win the division if Hogan and Shittu return and folks stay healthy.

Nota bene: If Stanford were in the Pac-12 South, my prediction would not be so bold.

Re: We're #4 - SeattleTree - 01-13-2015

(01-13-2015, 12:55 PM)Papa John link Wrote:That ranking was for the recently completed season. And perfectly reasonable in my opinion.

The ESPN Pac-12 blog actually ranked Stanford 7th both in the final ranking for this season (which I agree with you was perfectly reasonable) and in their early rankings for next season (which I think is too low).  I mistakenly linked just to the blog, rather than to the specific ranking to which I referred.  Here's a direct link:

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/83059/2015-too-early-pac-12-power-rankings

Re: We're #4 - Spiny_Norman - 01-13-2015

Basically, ESPN said, "We think Stanford in 2015 will not be better than any of the teams that finished ahead of it in 2014 - USC, UCLA, Oregon, ASU, Arizona, Utah."  I cannot make the case right now that Stanford should be considered better than any of those schools.  The team is just going to have to prove it, to me and the rest of the college football world, starting in week 3 @ USC and week 4 @ Oregon State. 

A Tale of Two Seasons - Hulk01 - 01-13-2015

Hogan, first seven games
122-210 (57%): 1537 yards, 7.3 yard per attempt
49 carries, 84 yards: 1.7 ypc. 12 yards per game

Final seven games
101-142 (71%): 1255 yards, 8.7 yards per attempt
42 carries, 211 yards: 5.0 ypc, 30 yards per game

Comparables (full season stats)
Mariota: 68%, 10.0 ypa, 5.7 yards per carry, 51 yards rushing per game
Kessler: 70%, 8.5 ypa, -2.8 yards per carry, -12 yards per game
Hundley: 69%, 8.0 ypa, 4.05 yards per carry, 49.5 yards per game




Re: We're #4 - Papa John - 01-13-2015

Thanks for setting me straight, SeattleTree. Actually, the Pac-12 Blog's predictions are not too dissimilar from mine. They're saying that Stanford will be the second-best team in the Pac-12 North with a number of South teams ahead of it. I'm making some assumptions--Hogan stays, Mariota leaves--I'm looking at Stanford's 2015 schedule, and I'm predicting that Stanford will finish ahead of Oregon (i.e. we'll beat Oregon at home next year) but will lose a couple of games to teams from the South.

Re: We're #4 - BostonCard - 01-13-2015

Wilner has us at #20 (assuming Hogan comes back).

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2015/01/13/my-ridiculously-early-college-football-top-25-for-2015-ohio-state-is-no-1/

BC

Re: We're #4 - Papa John - 01-14-2015

Yeah, I suppose it would make more sense to just wait until the smoke clears in a few weeks--at least post signing day--before we make these way-too-early predictions. But it's just so much fun...

I'm fired up for 2015!