11-02-2015, 01:33 PM
The weather for Colorado looks to be crisp, sunny, and no wind. Game to be played at about 50 degrees. Not bad for Boulder in November.Â
Week 10 Rankings
The weather for Colorado looks to be crisp, sunny, and no wind. Game to be played at about 50 degrees. Not bad for Boulder in November.Â
11-02-2015, 02:03 PM
(11-02-2015, 01:23 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:Does Wilner think the WSU blue print for stopping Stanford includes rainy and windy conditions? I do. If any other team tries the WSU game plan, Hogan will make them pay in the pass game. No way does Hooper play that poorly again this year either.
I do think that the template that Northwestern established (actually, Michigan State established it at the Rose Bowl), and WSU followed is the key to slowing Stanford down. If there is one position group on the offense that is weaker than the rest, it's our wide receivers. So, if I were game planning against Stanford, I'd have the cornerbacks defend our wide receivers in man-to-man, bump-and-run coverage, and bring the safeties up for run support, and push to pressure Hogan. It's not perfect; such a scheme would be susceptible to Rector beating the defense over-the-top on a play action pass if the pass rush doesn't get home, and if you don't have a DB with size, Cajuste will be able to beat you, but it's our opponents best bet against the Stanford offense.
BC
(11-02-2015, 01:23 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:Does Wilner think the WSU blue print for stopping Stanford includes rainy and windy conditions? I do. If any other team tries the WSU game plan, Hogan will make them pay in the pass game. No way does Hooper play that poorly again this year either.
I do think that the template that Northwestern established (actually, Michigan State established it at the Rose Bowl), and WSU followed is the key to slowing Stanford down. If there is one position group on the offense that is weaker than the rest, it's our wide receivers. So, if I were game planning against Stanford, I'd have the cornerbacks defend our wide receivers in man-to-man, bump-and-run coverage, and bring the safeties up for run support, and push to pressure Hogan. It's not perfect; such a scheme would be susceptible to Rector beating the defense over-the-top on a play action pass if the pass rush doesn't get home, and if you don't have a DB with size, Cajuste will be able to beat you, but it's our opponents best bet against the Stanford offense.
BC
11-02-2015, 02:06 PM
Actually, there is another counter to that defense that doesn't rely on WR play -- we used it to great effect against UW: it's Christian McCaffrey, receiver.
Actually, there is another counter to that defense that doesn't rely on WR play -- we used it to great effect against UW: it's Christian McCaffrey, receiver.
11-02-2015, 02:06 PM
(11-02-2015, 10:53 AM)stupac2 link Wrote:[quote author=CTcard link=topic=13471.msg138946#msg138946 date=1446486387]
If it were to end up that there were a bunch of 2-loss plus conference champs, we would have as much chance as anyone - assuming we were one of those.
Though the scenario is unlikely.
I think at this point it's vanishingly unlikely, there are just too many undefeated teams left for enough of them to implode.
[/quote]
Not necessarily.
Four of the Power 5 conferences have a playoff game. A two-loss team from one side of the bracket could upset a zero or one loss team from the other.
The ACC Coastal has one one-loss team, UNC. They could easily pick up another loss and could less-easily win the CCG.
The SEC seems quite plausible to have a two loss champ. Florida could pick up a loss to FSU ... and I guess it's not completely impossible they could lose to South Carolina on the road. On the other side, LSU could drop two of Alabama, Mississippi, Texas AM (all ranked) combined with Bama losing at Miss State or at Auburn (or to LSU if LSU loses the other two).
The math will make it tough for a two loss champ from either the Big Ten or the Big 12, but if there is a one loss Iowa Big Ten champ then I could imagine that their very weak schedule could drop them behind a two loss conference champ.
All in all not a likely situation, but the probability is not quite vanishingly small.
(11-02-2015, 10:53 AM)stupac2 link Wrote:[quote author=CTcard link=topic=13471.msg138946#msg138946 date=1446486387]
If it were to end up that there were a bunch of 2-loss plus conference champs, we would have as much chance as anyone - assuming we were one of those.
Though the scenario is unlikely.
I think at this point it's vanishingly unlikely, there are just too many undefeated teams left for enough of them to implode.
[/quote]
Not necessarily.
Four of the Power 5 conferences have a playoff game. A two-loss team from one side of the bracket could upset a zero or one loss team from the other.
The ACC Coastal has one one-loss team, UNC. They could easily pick up another loss and could less-easily win the CCG.
The SEC seems quite plausible to have a two loss champ. Florida could pick up a loss to FSU ... and I guess it's not completely impossible they could lose to South Carolina on the road. On the other side, LSU could drop two of Alabama, Mississippi, Texas AM (all ranked) combined with Bama losing at Miss State or at Auburn (or to LSU if LSU loses the other two).
The math will make it tough for a two loss champ from either the Big Ten or the Big 12, but if there is a one loss Iowa Big Ten champ then I could imagine that their very weak schedule could drop them behind a two loss conference champ.
All in all not a likely situation, but the probability is not quite vanishingly small.
11-02-2015, 02:13 PM
Nobody seems to believe me but a two loss SEC champ versus a one loss Pac12 champ in a down year for the Pac (at least in terms of OOC) and with a loss to a mediocre opponent is not as clear cut as many would like to think.
Same for us versus potential one loss champs from Big 10, and less so from Big 12. Even Clemson, with one loss but a solid win versus Notre Dame, could challenge us. For me to feel secure, I want multiple two loss conference champs.
Same for us versus potential one loss champs from Big 10, and less so from Big 12. Even Clemson, with one loss but a solid win versus Notre Dame, could challenge us. For me to feel secure, I want multiple two loss conference champs.
Nobody seems to believe me but a two loss SEC champ versus a one loss Pac12 champ in a down year for the Pac (at least in terms of OOC) and with a loss to a mediocre opponent is not as clear cut as many would like to think.
Same for us versus potential one loss champs from Big 10, and less so from Big 12. Even Clemson, with one loss but a solid win versus Notre Dame, could challenge us. For me to feel secure, I want multiple two loss conference champs.
Same for us versus potential one loss champs from Big 10, and less so from Big 12. Even Clemson, with one loss but a solid win versus Notre Dame, could challenge us. For me to feel secure, I want multiple two loss conference champs.
11-02-2015, 02:22 PM
(11-02-2015, 11:13 AM)stupac2 link Wrote:[quote author=thunder_chik link=topic=13471.msg138954#msg138954 date=1446487587]It's going to be interesting to see how the committee sorts out a whole slew of 1-loss teams.
Not really. Only teams that win their conferences (and probably ND, grumble grumble) will be in consideration, barring some kind of super crazy finish.
[/quote]
The real question is if a two loss Ole Miss won the SEC, would they get in over a one loss Bama/LSU, and would they be shut out of the playoffs by one loss teams from the ACC/B1G/ND/PAC-12/Big-12.
I'm not that worried about us if we win out, as that includes a win over what is currently a top-10 ND team who will probably be favored in their remaining games except for ours.
(11-02-2015, 11:13 AM)stupac2 link Wrote:[quote author=thunder_chik link=topic=13471.msg138954#msg138954 date=1446487587]It's going to be interesting to see how the committee sorts out a whole slew of 1-loss teams.
Not really. Only teams that win their conferences (and probably ND, grumble grumble) will be in consideration, barring some kind of super crazy finish.
[/quote]
The real question is if a two loss Ole Miss won the SEC, would they get in over a one loss Bama/LSU, and would they be shut out of the playoffs by one loss teams from the ACC/B1G/ND/PAC-12/Big-12.
I'm not that worried about us if we win out, as that includes a win over what is currently a top-10 ND team who will probably be favored in their remaining games except for ours.
11-02-2015, 02:25 PM
The reality is it's going to be a beauty contest, in addition to playoff games, the rest of this season for all teams in contention for the playoff.Â
As it relates to Stanford, they played one stinky game and reeled off six impressive games in a row. They just played another stinky game. If they can once again reel off six more impressive games, they will be in the National Championship game.
As it relates to Stanford, they played one stinky game and reeled off six impressive games in a row. They just played another stinky game. If they can once again reel off six more impressive games, they will be in the National Championship game.
The reality is it's going to be a beauty contest, in addition to playoff games, the rest of this season for all teams in contention for the playoff.Â
As it relates to Stanford, they played one stinky game and reeled off six impressive games in a row. They just played another stinky game. If they can once again reel off six more impressive games, they will be in the National Championship game.
As it relates to Stanford, they played one stinky game and reeled off six impressive games in a row. They just played another stinky game. If they can once again reel off six more impressive games, they will be in the National Championship game.
11-02-2015, 02:28 PM
Oh by the way, FSU isn't out of it yet either. If they beat top 3 Clemson and top 10ish Florida, their only loss is a fluke FG block to GT, much better looking than the garbage we put up against Northwestern and with better quality wins. That Northwestern game is just an absolute albatross for us.
Doesn't matter unless we win out of course, but we don't control our destiny, not by a mile.
Doesn't matter unless we win out of course, but we don't control our destiny, not by a mile.
Oh by the way, FSU isn't out of it yet either. If they beat top 3 Clemson and top 10ish Florida, their only loss is a fluke FG block to GT, much better looking than the garbage we put up against Northwestern and with better quality wins. That Northwestern game is just an absolute albatross for us.
Doesn't matter unless we win out of course, but we don't control our destiny, not by a mile.
Doesn't matter unless we win out of course, but we don't control our destiny, not by a mile.
11-02-2015, 02:31 PM
(11-02-2015, 02:28 PM)dabigv link Wrote:Oh by the way, FSU isn't out of it yet either. If they beat top 3 Clemson and top 10ish Florida, their only loss is a fluke FG block to GT, much better looking than the garbage we put up against Northwestern and with better quality wins. That Northwestern game is just an absolute albatross for us.
Doesn't matter unless we win out of course, but we don't control our destiny, not by a mile.
Northwestern is way better than Georgia Tech, and Stanford gets the benefit of the early start time argument.Â
(11-02-2015, 02:28 PM)dabigv link Wrote:Oh by the way, FSU isn't out of it yet either. If they beat top 3 Clemson and top 10ish Florida, their only loss is a fluke FG block to GT, much better looking than the garbage we put up against Northwestern and with better quality wins. That Northwestern game is just an absolute albatross for us.
Doesn't matter unless we win out of course, but we don't control our destiny, not by a mile.
Northwestern is way better than Georgia Tech, and Stanford gets the benefit of the early start time argument.Â
11-02-2015, 02:33 PM
Yeah, but Northwestern flat out beat us. Georgia Tech won with a crazy fluke play. One loss FSU with wins over Clemson and Florida beats us out for a spot, unfortunately.
11-02-2015, 02:34 PM
(11-02-2015, 02:06 PM)CTcard link Wrote:[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=13471.msg138949#msg138949 date=1446486821]
[quote author=CTcard link=topic=13471.msg138946#msg138946 date=1446486387]
If it were to end up that there were a bunch of 2-loss plus conference champs, we would have as much chance as anyone - assuming we were one of those.
Though the scenario is unlikely.
I think at this point it's vanishingly unlikely, there are just too many undefeated teams left for enough of them to implode.
[/quote]
Not necessarily.
Four of the Power 5 conferences have a playoff game. A two-loss team from one side of the bracket could upset a zero or one loss team from the other.
The ACC Coastal has one one-loss team, UNC. They could easily pick up another loss and could less-easily win the CCG.
The SEC seems quite plausible to have a two loss champ. Florida could pick up a loss to FSU ... and I guess it's not completely impossible they could lose to South Carolina on the road. On the other side, LSU could drop two of Alabama, Mississippi, Texas AM (all ranked) combined with Bama losing at Miss State or at Auburn (or to LSU if LSU loses the other two).
The math will make it tough for a two loss champ from either the Big Ten or the Big 12, but if there is a one loss Iowa Big Ten champ then I could imagine that their very weak schedule could drop them behind a two loss conference champ.
All in all not a likely situation, but the probability is not quite vanishingly small.[/quote]
I think the fact that you had to type that much invalidates your argument. The scenarios are getting pretty implausible pretty quickly and you need a few of them for Stanford to benefit. It's just not going to happen that the B1G, ACC, and SEC all have two-loss champions, and I think we'd need that, PLUS for our loss to not be against ND, for it to matter. What do you peg the odds of that at? It's gotta be less than 1%, and probably significantly less. Is it possible? Sure, but it's unlikely enough to write off.
(11-02-2015, 02:06 PM)CTcard link Wrote:[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=13471.msg138949#msg138949 date=1446486821]
[quote author=CTcard link=topic=13471.msg138946#msg138946 date=1446486387]
If it were to end up that there were a bunch of 2-loss plus conference champs, we would have as much chance as anyone - assuming we were one of those.
Though the scenario is unlikely.
I think at this point it's vanishingly unlikely, there are just too many undefeated teams left for enough of them to implode.
[/quote]
Not necessarily.
Four of the Power 5 conferences have a playoff game. A two-loss team from one side of the bracket could upset a zero or one loss team from the other.
The ACC Coastal has one one-loss team, UNC. They could easily pick up another loss and could less-easily win the CCG.
The SEC seems quite plausible to have a two loss champ. Florida could pick up a loss to FSU ... and I guess it's not completely impossible they could lose to South Carolina on the road. On the other side, LSU could drop two of Alabama, Mississippi, Texas AM (all ranked) combined with Bama losing at Miss State or at Auburn (or to LSU if LSU loses the other two).
The math will make it tough for a two loss champ from either the Big Ten or the Big 12, but if there is a one loss Iowa Big Ten champ then I could imagine that their very weak schedule could drop them behind a two loss conference champ.
All in all not a likely situation, but the probability is not quite vanishingly small.[/quote]
I think the fact that you had to type that much invalidates your argument. The scenarios are getting pretty implausible pretty quickly and you need a few of them for Stanford to benefit. It's just not going to happen that the B1G, ACC, and SEC all have two-loss champions, and I think we'd need that, PLUS for our loss to not be against ND, for it to matter. What do you peg the odds of that at? It's gotta be less than 1%, and probably significantly less. Is it possible? Sure, but it's unlikely enough to write off.
11-02-2015, 03:19 PM
(11-02-2015, 01:27 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:[quote author=Spiny_Norman link=topic=13471.msg138999#msg138999 date=1446494771]Sorry, FarmBoy. Wilner just writes click bait as far as I am concerned. I'll trust people like you to interpret for me, but I refuse to read any of his writing directly.
What? Why? I've been reading Wilner for a few years now and never gotten that impression.
[/quote]
Wilner is Skip Bayless without the megaphone. Bloviation with little if any basis in fact, and more often than not completely wrong.
(11-02-2015, 01:27 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:[quote author=Spiny_Norman link=topic=13471.msg138999#msg138999 date=1446494771]Sorry, FarmBoy. Wilner just writes click bait as far as I am concerned. I'll trust people like you to interpret for me, but I refuse to read any of his writing directly.
What? Why? I've been reading Wilner for a few years now and never gotten that impression.
[/quote]
Wilner is Skip Bayless without the megaphone. Bloviation with little if any basis in fact, and more often than not completely wrong.
11-02-2015, 03:26 PM
(11-02-2015, 03:19 PM)winflop link Wrote:Wilner is Skip Witless without the megaphone. Bloviation with little if any basis in fact, and more often than not completely wrong.
I disagree. I don't love Wilner, but he doesn't throw outrageous stuff up just to get a reaction. He may be wrong, but that's more often from ignorance than maliciousness.
BC
(11-02-2015, 03:19 PM)winflop link Wrote:Wilner is Skip Witless without the megaphone. Bloviation with little if any basis in fact, and more often than not completely wrong.
I disagree. I don't love Wilner, but he doesn't throw outrageous stuff up just to get a reaction. He may be wrong, but that's more often from ignorance than maliciousness.
BC
11-02-2015, 03:32 PM
http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...playoff-ax
We are one of 12 teams still in the mix for 4 spots:
Alabama, Baylor, Clemson, Florida, Iowa, LSU, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma State, Stanford and TCU.
There are a bunch of teams "on the fence".
BC
We are one of 12 teams still in the mix for 4 spots:
Alabama, Baylor, Clemson, Florida, Iowa, LSU, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma State, Stanford and TCU.
There are a bunch of teams "on the fence".
BC
http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...playoff-ax
We are one of 12 teams still in the mix for 4 spots:
Alabama, Baylor, Clemson, Florida, Iowa, LSU, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma State, Stanford and TCU.
There are a bunch of teams "on the fence".
BC
We are one of 12 teams still in the mix for 4 spots:
Alabama, Baylor, Clemson, Florida, Iowa, LSU, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma State, Stanford and TCU.
There are a bunch of teams "on the fence".
BC
Correct. Wilner writes some weird stuff but he's not mean-spirited.
11-02-2015, 03:37 PM
I also think there's some serious confirmation bias going on too (or maybe extremely long memories for sins I've missed), because while he does have some weird stuff it's really not that bad. You get the same kind of weirdness from pretty much every major news source, and at least Wilner is a local reporter who actually watches and writes about the games.
Sure, he's not Drukarev, but is he really any worse than ESPN's coverage?
Sure, he's not Drukarev, but is he really any worse than ESPN's coverage?
I also think there's some serious confirmation bias going on too (or maybe extremely long memories for sins I've missed), because while he does have some weird stuff it's really not that bad. You get the same kind of weirdness from pretty much every major news source, and at least Wilner is a local reporter who actually watches and writes about the games.
Sure, he's not Drukarev, but is he really any worse than ESPN's coverage?
Sure, he's not Drukarev, but is he really any worse than ESPN's coverage?
11-02-2015, 03:38 PM
Quote:I disagree. I don't love Wilner, but he doesn't throw outrageous stuff up just to get a reaction. He may be wrong, but that's more often from ignorance than maliciousness.
Pretty much sums up how I feel about Wilner. I used to really enjoy his blog, actually, as it elicited some good discussion and had a diversity of fans. But it slowly devolved into fans spewing ad hominen attacks at one another so it basically dried up. Still, I appreciate his "unique" take on things.
It's funny to say that there are only 12 teams that can win it when the team that won it last year was ranked 16th in the first play off poll.
Quote:I disagree. I don't love Wilner, but he doesn't throw outrageous stuff up just to get a reaction. He may be wrong, but that's more often from ignorance than maliciousness.
Pretty much sums up how I feel about Wilner. I used to really enjoy his blog, actually, as it elicited some good discussion and had a diversity of fans. But it slowly devolved into fans spewing ad hominen attacks at one another so it basically dried up. Still, I appreciate his "unique" take on things.
It's funny to say that there are only 12 teams that can win it when the team that won it last year was ranked 16th in the first play off poll.
Several years ago Wilner seemed to be following the click-bait path but he's tamed down the outrageousness considerably.Â
Some Stanford fans will remember when he called Stanford's defense in Harbaugh's first year the "worst in Pac 10/12 history, maybe worst ever" and seemed oblivious to the turn around many of us were watching weekly. We remember him calling Stanford's front court with the NBA bound Lopez twins "third best in the Bay Area" behind a C.al front court that was competent and a USF front court I barely remember. If you didn't turn him off after that you'll notice he's turned down the silly superlatives and has added more substance. He still misses the subtle trends but I forgive him due to his singular focus on college sports in a pro focused region. The region needs that.
After all most of the Bay Area doesn't have the Cardboard bookmarked for daily reading.
Some Stanford fans will remember when he called Stanford's defense in Harbaugh's first year the "worst in Pac 10/12 history, maybe worst ever" and seemed oblivious to the turn around many of us were watching weekly. We remember him calling Stanford's front court with the NBA bound Lopez twins "third best in the Bay Area" behind a C.al front court that was competent and a USF front court I barely remember. If you didn't turn him off after that you'll notice he's turned down the silly superlatives and has added more substance. He still misses the subtle trends but I forgive him due to his singular focus on college sports in a pro focused region. The region needs that.
After all most of the Bay Area doesn't have the Cardboard bookmarked for daily reading.
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
(This post was last modified: 11-02-2015, 03:43 PM by Leftcoast.)
Several years ago Wilner seemed to be following the click-bait path but he's tamed down the outrageousness considerably.Â
Some Stanford fans will remember when he called Stanford's defense in Harbaugh's first year the "worst in Pac 10/12 history, maybe worst ever" and seemed oblivious to the turn around many of us were watching weekly. We remember him calling Stanford's front court with the NBA bound Lopez twins "third best in the Bay Area" behind a C.al front court that was competent and a USF front court I barely remember. If you didn't turn him off after that you'll notice he's turned down the silly superlatives and has added more substance. He still misses the subtle trends but I forgive him due to his singular focus on college sports in a pro focused region. The region needs that.
After all most of the Bay Area doesn't have the Cardboard bookmarked for daily reading.
Some Stanford fans will remember when he called Stanford's defense in Harbaugh's first year the "worst in Pac 10/12 history, maybe worst ever" and seemed oblivious to the turn around many of us were watching weekly. We remember him calling Stanford's front court with the NBA bound Lopez twins "third best in the Bay Area" behind a C.al front court that was competent and a USF front court I barely remember. If you didn't turn him off after that you'll notice he's turned down the silly superlatives and has added more substance. He still misses the subtle trends but I forgive him due to his singular focus on college sports in a pro focused region. The region needs that.
After all most of the Bay Area doesn't have the Cardboard bookmarked for daily reading.
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
11-02-2015, 05:07 PM
Also, he provides more coverage of Stanford for a general audience than just about anyone possibly excepting the ESPN blog. In an era where local coverage of sports teams (especially college sports teams in a pro-oriented region) is lacking, I appreciate that he actually provides some coverage.
BC
BC
Also, he provides more coverage of Stanford for a general audience than just about anyone possibly excepting the ESPN blog. In an era where local coverage of sports teams (especially college sports teams in a pro-oriented region) is lacking, I appreciate that he actually provides some coverage.
BC
BC
11-02-2015, 08:03 PM
(11-02-2015, 02:28 PM)dabigv link Wrote:Oh by the way, FSU isn't out of it yet either. If they beat top 3 Clemson and top 10ish Florida, their only loss is a fluke FG block to GT, much better looking than the garbage we put up against Northwestern and with better quality wins. That Northwestern game is just an absolute albatross for us.
Doesn't matter unless we win out of course, but we don't control our destiny, not by a mile.
Why do you focus on the loss than on the wins?
And you are correct, no one loss team in the country controls its own destiny at this point - though Bama might be on the edge of that.
(11-02-2015, 02:28 PM)dabigv link Wrote:Oh by the way, FSU isn't out of it yet either. If they beat top 3 Clemson and top 10ish Florida, their only loss is a fluke FG block to GT, much better looking than the garbage we put up against Northwestern and with better quality wins. That Northwestern game is just an absolute albatross for us.
Doesn't matter unless we win out of course, but we don't control our destiny, not by a mile.
Why do you focus on the loss than on the wins?
And you are correct, no one loss team in the country controls its own destiny at this point - though Bama might be on the edge of that.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »