[estephan500]

Some of you guys do fancy things like analyze sagarin and talk fancy statistical whatchacallits. I just watch the little movies. The little movies they show me in the right column of espn.com:

1-- This little movie is happy because the guy says that there's no question that unbeaten stanford will emerge above unbeaten clemson and unbeaten boise state, it's mostly an issue of the current snapshot being taken at a point before our harder games.  http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=7142061

2-- This little movie is funny because when stanford comes up in their rankings countdown, the analyst starts on a heated pro-stanford diatribe that they clearly edited out -- there is a big ugly video edit practically in mid-sentence:  http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=7142001

Joe Bob

[estephan500]

Some of you guys do fancy things like analyze sagarin and talk fancy statistical whatchacallits. I just watch the little movies. The little movies they show me in the right column of espn.com:

1-- This little movie is happy because the guy says that there's no question that unbeaten stanford will emerge above unbeaten clemson and unbeaten boise state, it's mostly an issue of the current snapshot being taken at a point before our harder games.  http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=7142061

2-- This little movie is funny because when stanford comes up in their rankings countdown, the analyst starts on a heated pro-stanford diatribe that they clearly edited out -- there is a big ugly video edit practically in mid-sentence:  http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=7142001

Joe Bob

[estephan500]

on the topic of lowbrow pursuits, reading the FB comments on gameday broadcasting from the Stanford-SC game, I don't dispute any of this guy's three main points:

[estephan500]

on the topic of lowbrow pursuits, reading the FB comments on gameday broadcasting from the Stanford-SC game, I don't dispute any of this guy's three main points:

[wyattp]

That second video is hillarious

[wyattp]

That second video is hillarious

[Robbie]

Rankings are focused on position - Who is #1? You are #6! - but the numerical values are very illustrative. There is only a very small numerical difference between Clemson, Boise and Stanford. There is a big gap between Boise and Oklahoma State, and an even bigger gap between Stanford and Oregon. Stanford is essentially in a three-way tie for third.

I'm not worried about the BCS. If Stanford keeps winning they will either be in the BCS championship (huge win) or the Rose Bowl (huge win.)

USC, Oregon and Notre Dame. That's what matters.

And beating Cal. This year that will probably be icing, but it's always very sweet icing.

[Robbie]

Rankings are focused on position - Who is #1? You are #6! - but the numerical values are very illustrative. There is only a very small numerical difference between Clemson, Boise and Stanford. There is a big gap between Boise and Oklahoma State, and an even bigger gap between Stanford and Oregon. Stanford is essentially in a three-way tie for third.

I'm not worried about the BCS. If Stanford keeps winning they will either be in the BCS championship (huge win) or the Rose Bowl (huge win.)

USC, Oregon and Notre Dame. That's what matters.

And beating Cal. This year that will probably be icing, but it's always very sweet icing.

[estephan500]

damn, you beat me to it. I was going to make a post here saying "All of the bowl stuff comes second to what I really want -- to evenly distribute the golden bears across the entire field. I want to go for a century on them." everything else could be icing

[estephan500]

damn, you beat me to it. I was going to make a post here saying "All of the bowl stuff comes second to what I really want -- to evenly distribute the golden bears across the entire field. I want to go for a century on them." everything else could be icing