[lex24]

I’m not conceding that this run is over. But this will be the second “down” year in a row by current standards. So I figured I’d give some context to the run they have had. I went back and looked at their record from 1970 to 2009. With 2010 to me signaling the beginning of the run.

This may be off a bit. But it will be close enough to get the point:

From ‘70 to ‘09 the overall record is 216-228-8. .477. In that stretch they won 3 Pac 8 and 10 crowns. 70,71, 99.  They went to 12 Bowls overall. 18 seasons over .500. 21 under.

From 90 to 09 they were worse. 102-125-2. .445. 7 Bowls. 7 seasons over .500. 12 under.

So, this has been historically an incredible run. One I thought I’d never see. They had a decent run of success from ‘70 to ‘80. 10 seasons with 9 above .500 one at .500. But nothing close to this.

[lex24]

I’m not conceding that this run is over. But this will be the second “down” year in a row by current standards. So I figured I’d give some context to the run they have had. I went back and looked at their record from 1970 to 2009. With 2010 to me signaling the beginning of the run.

This may be off a bit. But it will be close enough to get the point:

From ‘70 to ‘09 the overall record is 216-228-8. .477. In that stretch they won 3 Pac 8 and 10 crowns. 70,71, 99.  They went to 12 Bowls overall. 18 seasons over .500. 21 under.

From 90 to 09 they were worse. 102-125-2. .445. 7 Bowls. 7 seasons over .500. 12 under.

So, this has been historically an incredible run. One I thought I’d never see. They had a decent run of success from ‘70 to ‘80. 10 seasons with 9 above .500 one at .500. But nothing close to this.

[stupac2]

...How is going 10-3 a "down" year? I'm still really confused by this.

[stupac2]

...How is going 10-3 a "down" year? I'm still really confused by this.

[lex24]

I said by current standards. And I guess it was the manner of the losses last year. Couple blow outs. But you make a good point.

...How is going 10-3 a "down" year? I'm still really confused by this.

[lex24]

I said by current standards. And I guess it was the manner of the losses last year. Couple blow outs. But you make a good point.

...How is going 10-3 a "down" year? I'm still really confused by this.

[81alum]

...How is going 10-3 a "down" year? I'm still really confused by this.

I agree.

OSU and WSU looked so bad that I think folks are assuming we will lose-out and be 6-6.  But it looked just as bad after SDSU and we won 5 in a row.  With three games coming up at home, there is at least some chance that the ship will be wrighted and we will go on to a good season.  There is a big difference between 10-3 and 6-7, and the way we play from here on out will determine which result we get.

If we lose our remaining three games at home--then I will be willing to concede that the run seems over.  But keeping the axe for the eighth year in a row is still something worth aspiring to.  Has that ever been done?

[81alum]

...How is going 10-3 a "down" year? I'm still really confused by this.

I agree.

OSU and WSU looked so bad that I think folks are assuming we will lose-out and be 6-6.  But it looked just as bad after SDSU and we won 5 in a row.  With three games coming up at home, there is at least some chance that the ship will be wrighted and we will go on to a good season.  There is a big difference between 10-3 and 6-7, and the way we play from here on out will determine which result we get.

If we lose our remaining three games at home--then I will be willing to concede that the run seems over.  But keeping the axe for the eighth year in a row is still something worth aspiring to.  Has that ever been done?

[PalmTree]

I’m not conceding that this run is over. But this will be the second “down” year in a row by current standards. So I figured I’d give some context to the run they have had. I went back and looked at their record from 1970 to 2009. With 2010 to me signaling the beginning of the run.

This may be off a bit. But it will be close enough to get the point:

From ‘70 to ‘09 the overall record is 216-228-8. .477. In that stretch they won 3 Pac 8 and 10 crowns. 70,71, 99.  They went to 12 Bowls overall. 18 seasons over .500. 21 under.

From 90 to 09 they were worse. 102-125-2. .445. 7 Bowls. 7 seasons over .500. 12 under.

So, this has been historically an incredible run. One I thought I’d never see. They had a decent run of success from ‘70 to ‘80. 10 seasons with 9 above .500 one at .500. But nothing close to this.

I think it's also helpful to remember that we went 17-40 from 2002 through 2006 - those years were just plain brutal, period. Short-side sweeps and quick kicks....I don't miss those at all.  And remember when our recruiting fortunes seemed to hinge on divining a pet dog's random thoughts during a walk down the beach? Granted, Harbs's teams then went 9-15 his first two years, but it's been mostly a pretty sweet ride since.  Not saying I like these two  "down" years or that we can't do better, even with personnel/depth and play-calling shortcomings - but agree some long-range perspective is helpful

[PalmTree]

I’m not conceding that this run is over. But this will be the second “down” year in a row by current standards. So I figured I’d give some context to the run they have had. I went back and looked at their record from 1970 to 2009. With 2010 to me signaling the beginning of the run.

This may be off a bit. But it will be close enough to get the point:

From ‘70 to ‘09 the overall record is 216-228-8. .477. In that stretch they won 3 Pac 8 and 10 crowns. 70,71, 99.  They went to 12 Bowls overall. 18 seasons over .500. 21 under.

From 90 to 09 they were worse. 102-125-2. .445. 7 Bowls. 7 seasons over .500. 12 under.

So, this has been historically an incredible run. One I thought I’d never see. They had a decent run of success from ‘70 to ‘80. 10 seasons with 9 above .500 one at .500. But nothing close to this.

I think it's also helpful to remember that we went 17-40 from 2002 through 2006 - those years were just plain brutal, period. Short-side sweeps and quick kicks....I don't miss those at all.  And remember when our recruiting fortunes seemed to hinge on divining a pet dog's random thoughts during a walk down the beach? Granted, Harbs's teams then went 9-15 his first two years, but it's been mostly a pretty sweet ride since.  Not saying I like these two  "down" years or that we can't do better, even with personnel/depth and play-calling shortcomings - but agree some long-range perspective is helpful

[thunder_chik]

From this fan's perspective (45 years), a "down" year would be one in which we lose more games than we win.  That said, I am frustrated by our team's performances the last two games (didn't "deserve" to beat the Beavs and although I didn't see most of the game yesterday because of Fox's switchback to the Penn State/MSU game, I think it was within the realm of possibility to have beaten the Cougs yesterday), but I am hopeful that we win at least one more game.  And with UW moving up to the #9 AP spot and ND to #3, we have opportunities to upset the apple cart.

[thunder_chik]

From this fan's perspective (45 years), a "down" year would be one in which we lose more games than we win.  That said, I am frustrated by our team's performances the last two games (didn't "deserve" to beat the Beavs and although I didn't see most of the game yesterday because of Fox's switchback to the Penn State/MSU game, I think it was within the realm of possibility to have beaten the Cougs yesterday), but I am hopeful that we win at least one more game.  And with UW moving up to the #9 AP spot and ND to #3, we have opportunities to upset the apple cart.

[stupac2]

I said by current standards. And I guess it was the manner of the losses last year. Couple blow outs. But you make a good point.

Yeah, we had those two blowouts and the brutal Colorado game, but the team was also super injured. I'm not sure I can think of a team with more injuries to key players during a short stretch, maybe the Chargers a couple years ago? The Giants now? At any rate we were playing without our top two corners, a few linemen, our top two RBs were both banged up, and IIRC a couple other role players. That was the sort thing you might be able to survive if it's timed well relative to your opponents, but boy howdy was it not. It was bad and it ended up being bad.

But we still won 10 games! That it felt like a disappointment is more about our current standards than anything else, it really wasn't that big of a down year.

If we lose our remaining three games at home--then I will be willing to concede that the run seems over.

Eh... if that were to happen it would be pretty brutal and an indictment of the coaches, but I don't think even then you'd say that the run was over. We went 7-5 in the regular season in 2014 and then to the Rose Bowl the next year. College football can be really streaky, did anyone see this year coming from FSU, for instance? But to think that this means they're going to be a perennial "happy to get to 6 wins" teams is foolhardy. Our peak wasn't quite as high as theirs, but I think Shaw should get that same benefit of the doubt.

[stupac2]

I said by current standards. And I guess it was the manner of the losses last year. Couple blow outs. But you make a good point.

Yeah, we had those two blowouts and the brutal Colorado game, but the team was also super injured. I'm not sure I can think of a team with more injuries to key players during a short stretch, maybe the Chargers a couple years ago? The Giants now? At any rate we were playing without our top two corners, a few linemen, our top two RBs were both banged up, and IIRC a couple other role players. That was the sort thing you might be able to survive if it's timed well relative to your opponents, but boy howdy was it not. It was bad and it ended up being bad.

But we still won 10 games! That it felt like a disappointment is more about our current standards than anything else, it really wasn't that big of a down year.

If we lose our remaining three games at home--then I will be willing to concede that the run seems over.

Eh... if that were to happen it would be pretty brutal and an indictment of the coaches, but I don't think even then you'd say that the run was over. We went 7-5 in the regular season in 2014 and then to the Rose Bowl the next year. College football can be really streaky, did anyone see this year coming from FSU, for instance? But to think that this means they're going to be a perennial "happy to get to 6 wins" teams is foolhardy. Our peak wasn't quite as high as theirs, but I think Shaw should get that same benefit of the doubt.

[washingtonismoney]

Yeah, I wouldn't concede the run is over. I would say that Stanford fans' expectations are well in advance of what outside expectations are. Shaw has overperformed preseason over-under expectations by about a win per game so far in his career; if the team finishes 7-5 (as appears most likely) it'll only be the second seasonal underperformance for his entire career. Of course, on a game-by-game basis Stanford is second in the country against the spread over Shaw's career. What this reflects is that Shaw has well overperformed expectations of the money guys, who are much better at projecting things than are Stanford fans.

Second point: while this year has been frustrating it's a very inexperienced offense, the most inexperienced of Shaw's tenure, in fact; defensively, you have underperformance from the DBs and a very subpar defensive line. This may sound aggressive, but I think it's true: with the right combination of returning players, I think 2018 will be a top-ten type of year (barring aggressively poor coaching or massive injuries).

That said, 2017 so far has been an underperformance and any time you underperform it behooves you to examine the exact reasons why. I don't have any reason to think Shaw won't do that.

[washingtonismoney]

Yeah, I wouldn't concede the run is over. I would say that Stanford fans' expectations are well in advance of what outside expectations are. Shaw has overperformed preseason over-under expectations by about a win per game so far in his career; if the team finishes 7-5 (as appears most likely) it'll only be the second seasonal underperformance for his entire career. Of course, on a game-by-game basis Stanford is second in the country against the spread over Shaw's career. What this reflects is that Shaw has well overperformed expectations of the money guys, who are much better at projecting things than are Stanford fans.

Second point: while this year has been frustrating it's a very inexperienced offense, the most inexperienced of Shaw's tenure, in fact; defensively, you have underperformance from the DBs and a very subpar defensive line. This may sound aggressive, but I think it's true: with the right combination of returning players, I think 2018 will be a top-ten type of year (barring aggressively poor coaching or massive injuries).

That said, 2017 so far has been an underperformance and any time you underperform it behooves you to examine the exact reasons why. I don't have any reason to think Shaw won't do that.

[stupac2]

Shaw has overperformed preseason over-under expectations by about a win per game so far in his career;

I must have missed all those 20-win seasons!

[stupac2]

Shaw has overperformed preseason over-under expectations by about a win per game so far in his career;

I must have missed all those 20-win seasons!

[washingtonismoney]

I must have missed all those 20-win seasons!

Lol. Win per season.

[washingtonismoney]

I must have missed all those 20-win seasons!

Lol. Win per season.

[winflop]

...How is going 10-3 a "down" year? I'm still really confused by this.

I appreciate the optimism, but this team hasn't lost its last game of the season, absent massive improvements in offensive coaching and OL play.

[winflop]

...How is going 10-3 a "down" year? I'm still really confused by this.

I appreciate the optimism, but this team hasn't lost its last game of the season, absent massive improvements in offensive coaching and OL play.

[stupac2]

[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=17914.msg210836#msg210836 date=1509907714]
...How is going 10-3 a "down" year? I'm still really confused by this.

I appreciate the optimism, but this team hasn't lost its last game of the season, absent massive improvements in offensive coaching and OL play.
[/quote]

Oh, haha I meant last year. OP was counting last year as a down year but we went 10-3.

I doubt we win out, but you never know!

[stupac2]

[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=17914.msg210836#msg210836 date=1509907714]
...How is going 10-3 a "down" year? I'm still really confused by this.

I appreciate the optimism, but this team hasn't lost its last game of the season, absent massive improvements in offensive coaching and OL play.
[/quote]

Oh, haha I meant last year. OP was counting last year as a down year but we went 10-3.

I doubt we win out, but you never know!

[winflop]

I don't think the run is over by any stretch

[winflop]

I don't think the run is over by any stretch

[yvonne]

Does anyone see a likely win remaining? At this point, I'd say Big Game is a push. Next week and Notre Dame are probable losses.

[yvonne]

Does anyone see a likely win remaining? At this point, I'd say Big Game is a push. Next week and Notre Dame are probable losses.

[stupac2]

Does anyone see a likely win remaining? At this point, I'd say Big Game is a push. Next week and Notre Dame are probable losses.

It depends on what you think this team's true performance level is. If you think that the home games against ASU and Oregon are our actual ability, then I'd put the O/U for wins at 1.5 (I'd say the mean is like 1.8, though). If you think it's the road games against Oregon State and Washington State, then it's probably at 1 (there's just no way Big Game is a push).

The fact that there's a brobdingnagian road/home split in our results so far ought to tell you which way to lean.

[stupac2]

Does anyone see a likely win remaining? At this point, I'd say Big Game is a push. Next week and Notre Dame are probable losses.

It depends on what you think this team's true performance level is. If you think that the home games against ASU and Oregon are our actual ability, then I'd put the O/U for wins at 1.5 (I'd say the mean is like 1.8, though). If you think it's the road games against Oregon State and Washington State, then it's probably at 1 (there's just no way Big Game is a push).

The fact that there's a brobdingnagian road/home split in our results so far ought to tell you which way to lean.

[82lsju]

Does anyone see a likely win remaining? At this point, I'd say Big Game is a push. Next week and Votre Dame are probable losses.

we'll see, Cal so far has one road win in their first game vs NC, since then they have lost

- Oregon 45-25
- Washington 38-7
- Colorado 44-28

but they do have two weeks to prepare for Big Game with a bye this weeknd.....

[82lsju]

Does anyone see a likely win remaining? At this point, I'd say Big Game is a push. Next week and Votre Dame are probable losses.

we'll see, Cal so far has one road win in their first game vs NC, since then they have lost

- Oregon 45-25
- Washington 38-7
- Colorado 44-28

but they do have two weeks to prepare for Big Game with a bye this weeknd.....

[JJJ]

[quote author=Yvonne link=topic=17914.msg210882#msg210882 date=1509920539]
Does anyone see a likely win remaining? At this point, I'd say Big Game is a push. Next week and Votre Dame are probable losses.

we'll see, ןɐɔ so far has one road win in their first game vs NC, since then they have lost

- Oregon 45-25
- Washington 38-7
- Colorado 44-28

but they do have two weeks to prepare for Big Game with a bye this weeknd.....
[/quote]

Since the question was asked, I'm going on the record as saying we can beat UW, Cal, and ND. Sure, we'll need "Good Stanford" to show up each and every week, but  I'm going to believe it can be done, until proven otherwise.  8)

[JJJ]

[quote author=Yvonne link=topic=17914.msg210882#msg210882 date=1509920539]
Does anyone see a likely win remaining? At this point, I'd say Big Game is a push. Next week and Votre Dame are probable losses.

we'll see, ןɐɔ so far has one road win in their first game vs NC, since then they have lost

- Oregon 45-25
- Washington 38-7
- Colorado 44-28

but they do have two weeks to prepare for Big Game with a bye this weeknd.....
[/quote]

Since the question was asked, I'm going on the record as saying we can beat UW, Cal, and ND. Sure, we'll need "Good Stanford" to show up each and every week, but  I'm going to believe it can be done, until proven otherwise.  8)

[Langdude]

Can I raise a practical question at this point?

Are we going to do "Stonehenge" tomorrow?

-m.

[Langdude]

Can I raise a practical question at this point?

Are we going to do "Stonehenge" tomorrow?

-m.

[82lsju]

Since the question was asked, I'm going on the record as saying we can beat UW, ןɐɔ, and ND. Sure, we'll need "Good Stanford" to show up each and every week, but  I'm going to believe it can be done, until proven otherwise.  8)

we did beat a highly ranked UW team in 1982......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5e56jPompuU

[82lsju]

Since the question was asked, I'm going on the record as saying we can beat UW, ןɐɔ, and ND. Sure, we'll need "Good Stanford" to show up each and every week, but  I'm going to believe it can be done, until proven otherwise.  8)

we did beat a highly ranked UW team in 1982......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5e56jPompuU

[gocard14]

  I to am keeping he faith that we can play like the team that beat Oregon and ASU at home. Why we underperform so badly on the road, especially with Oline play, is something we need to assess, but for now I feel pretty good about our chances against Cal and even UW i think will be a toss up.

The Irish worry me a great deal, however, because their style, pound the ball with a strong between the tackles running game to set up the pass, is exactly what we struggle to defend this year, especially if our offense isn’t sustaining drives well. The teams that we’ve had better defensive showings against have generally been pretty one dimensional, partially due to a combo or bad QBs and injuries.

[gocard14]

  I to am keeping he faith that we can play like the team that beat Oregon and ASU at home. Why we underperform so badly on the road, especially with Oline play, is something we need to assess, but for now I feel pretty good about our chances against Cal and even UW i think will be a toss up.

The Irish worry me a great deal, however, because their style, pound the ball with a strong between the tackles running game to set up the pass, is exactly what we struggle to defend this year, especially if our offense isn’t sustaining drives well. The teams that we’ve had better defensive showings against have generally been pretty one dimensional, partially due to a combo or bad QBs and injuries.