09-10-2012, 10:04 AM
So, what will it be this week?
Be extra bold, after you've voted, tell us how you voted!
Be extra bold, after you've voted, tell us how you voted!
Poll: Tell us the outcome of the USC game! - You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Stanford wins by 20+
1.82%
1
1.82%
Stanford wins by 10-19
5.45%
3
5.45%
Stanford wins by less than 10
47.27%
26
47.27%
USC wins by less than 10
18.18%
10
18.18%
USC wins by 10-19
25.45%
14
25.45%
USC wins by 20+
1.82%
1
1.82%
* You voted for this item.
Show Results
Predict the USC margin
09-10-2012, 10:34 AM
First to predict a Stanford win. ;D
If USC really is down to a third on the depth chart redshirt freshman at Center then all could be OK. I like the idea that the A Gaps could be vulnerable all game long. If the Stanford Front 7 can get Barkley to get rid of the ball quickly and/or if the SC game plan is switched to quick routes then things could work out.
I also am set to believe that starting Peat and Hewitt would be big for the offense.
But in the end my pick is based on the idea that teams in the #15-20 range in the polls at home beat top 5 teams fairly often.
As a ticket holder in the stands, I should go in to this game believing they COULD get it done. Right? Stanford 34 - SC 31
If USC really is down to a third on the depth chart redshirt freshman at Center then all could be OK. I like the idea that the A Gaps could be vulnerable all game long. If the Stanford Front 7 can get Barkley to get rid of the ball quickly and/or if the SC game plan is switched to quick routes then things could work out.
I also am set to believe that starting Peat and Hewitt would be big for the offense.
But in the end my pick is based on the idea that teams in the #15-20 range in the polls at home beat top 5 teams fairly often.
As a ticket holder in the stands, I should go in to this game believing they COULD get it done. Right? Stanford 34 - SC 31
First to predict a Stanford win. ;D
If USC really is down to a third on the depth chart redshirt freshman at Center then all could be OK. I like the idea that the A Gaps could be vulnerable all game long. If the Stanford Front 7 can get Barkley to get rid of the ball quickly and/or if the SC game plan is switched to quick routes then things could work out.
I also am set to believe that starting Peat and Hewitt would be big for the offense.
But in the end my pick is based on the idea that teams in the #15-20 range in the polls at home beat top 5 teams fairly often.
As a ticket holder in the stands, I should go in to this game believing they COULD get it done. Right? Stanford 34 - SC 31
If USC really is down to a third on the depth chart redshirt freshman at Center then all could be OK. I like the idea that the A Gaps could be vulnerable all game long. If the Stanford Front 7 can get Barkley to get rid of the ball quickly and/or if the SC game plan is switched to quick routes then things could work out.
I also am set to believe that starting Peat and Hewitt would be big for the offense.
But in the end my pick is based on the idea that teams in the #15-20 range in the polls at home beat top 5 teams fairly often.
As a ticket holder in the stands, I should go in to this game believing they COULD get it done. Right? Stanford 34 - SC 31
09-10-2012, 11:07 AM
Good guys win by less than 10. Don't want to jinx the game by angering the woofing gods with a bombastic pick...
09-10-2012, 11:17 AM
Tough call. I said Card by less than 10, but it could swing wildly for any number of reasons.Â
USC reaching down to a third string center could be big, as could not having their starting kicker Heidari, who was first string all PAC 12 in 2011. USC is still also breaking in a new LT, and has limited depth on the D line, and is having problems at one corner position. Card needs to have a decent running game to make this all happen I think. Defense also has play at a high intensity level the whole game.
USC reaching down to a third string center could be big, as could not having their starting kicker Heidari, who was first string all PAC 12 in 2011. USC is still also breaking in a new LT, and has limited depth on the D line, and is having problems at one corner position. Card needs to have a decent running game to make this all happen I think. Defense also has play at a high intensity level the whole game.
Tough call. I said Card by less than 10, but it could swing wildly for any number of reasons.Â
USC reaching down to a third string center could be big, as could not having their starting kicker Heidari, who was first string all PAC 12 in 2011. USC is still also breaking in a new LT, and has limited depth on the D line, and is having problems at one corner position. Card needs to have a decent running game to make this all happen I think. Defense also has play at a high intensity level the whole game.
USC reaching down to a third string center could be big, as could not having their starting kicker Heidari, who was first string all PAC 12 in 2011. USC is still also breaking in a new LT, and has limited depth on the D line, and is having problems at one corner position. Card needs to have a decent running game to make this all happen I think. Defense also has play at a high intensity level the whole game.
09-10-2012, 11:41 AM
We either eke it out by less than a TD, or we lose big. I think that if we fall behind early, things could get out of control fast. But if we jump to a lead, we'll be fighting them off all night. Unfortunately, I think our offense is not yet mature enough. If our run game had shown a stronger performance during the first two games, I would be more optimistic.
But it would be fantastic to send "the greatest QB is U.SC program history" to an 0-4 career against the Cardinal. They're going to put up a statue of that guy in South Central, and he's guaranteed a losing record against us. Fantastic.
But it would be fantastic to send "the greatest QB is U.SC program history" to an 0-4 career against the Cardinal. They're going to put up a statue of that guy in South Central, and he's guaranteed a losing record against us. Fantastic.
We either eke it out by less than a TD, or we lose big. I think that if we fall behind early, things could get out of control fast. But if we jump to a lead, we'll be fighting them off all night. Unfortunately, I think our offense is not yet mature enough. If our run game had shown a stronger performance during the first two games, I would be more optimistic.
But it would be fantastic to send "the greatest QB is U.SC program history" to an 0-4 career against the Cardinal. They're going to put up a statue of that guy in South Central, and he's guaranteed a losing record against us. Fantastic.
But it would be fantastic to send "the greatest QB is U.SC program history" to an 0-4 career against the Cardinal. They're going to put up a statue of that guy in South Central, and he's guaranteed a losing record against us. Fantastic.
Cardinal96
Unregistered
Unregistered
09-10-2012, 11:45 AM
I say USC 35, Stanford 28. We keep it close for four quarters but ultimately the USC receivers make the difference.
I say USC 35, Stanford 28. We keep it close for four quarters but ultimately the USC receivers make the difference.
09-10-2012, 01:07 PM
I picked us by less than 10, based on pure wishful thinking.
I picked us by less than 10, based on pure wishful thinking.
09-10-2012, 01:15 PM
Can the Cardinal exploit Trojan weaknesses better than the University of South Central can exploit Stanford's shortcomings? I think not but I hope otherwise.
btw, the the University of South Central game report mentions that the 1st string center was on crutches (and Draco Malfoy asked his twitter followers to pray for him). But no mention of an injury to the backup center. The writer also mentioned the ineffectiveness of the CBs not named Nickell Robey.
http://bit.ly/SvaUwL
btw, the the University of South Central game report mentions that the 1st string center was on crutches (and Draco Malfoy asked his twitter followers to pray for him). But no mention of an injury to the backup center. The writer also mentioned the ineffectiveness of the CBs not named Nickell Robey.
http://bit.ly/SvaUwL
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
Can the Cardinal exploit Trojan weaknesses better than the University of South Central can exploit Stanford's shortcomings? I think not but I hope otherwise.
btw, the the University of South Central game report mentions that the 1st string center was on crutches (and Draco Malfoy asked his twitter followers to pray for him). But no mention of an injury to the backup center. The writer also mentioned the ineffectiveness of the CBs not named Nickell Robey.
http://bit.ly/SvaUwL
btw, the the University of South Central game report mentions that the 1st string center was on crutches (and Draco Malfoy asked his twitter followers to pray for him). But no mention of an injury to the backup center. The writer also mentioned the ineffectiveness of the CBs not named Nickell Robey.
http://bit.ly/SvaUwL
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
09-10-2012, 02:21 PM
Less than 10.
Story of the game is that our O-line dominates far more than they have in the last few games.Â
Story of the game is that our O-line dominates far more than they have in the last few games.Â
09-10-2012, 02:45 PM
I fear Troi loads the box to stuff run game and has sufficient DB play to not pay dearly for it. Not much ball control by Cardinal so Draco et al. have many opportunities to go downfield.
Stanford D gets weary late in game and SC busts some long plays to make final margin greater than game appeared. (SC by 10-19).
Happy to be wrong, and maybe hedging my karmic bets some.
Stanford D gets weary late in game and SC busts some long plays to make final margin greater than game appeared. (SC by 10-19).
Happy to be wrong, and maybe hedging my karmic bets some.
I fear Troi loads the box to stuff run game and has sufficient DB play to not pay dearly for it. Not much ball control by Cardinal so Draco et al. have many opportunities to go downfield.
Stanford D gets weary late in game and SC busts some long plays to make final margin greater than game appeared. (SC by 10-19).
Happy to be wrong, and maybe hedging my karmic bets some.
Stanford D gets weary late in game and SC busts some long plays to make final margin greater than game appeared. (SC by 10-19).
Happy to be wrong, and maybe hedging my karmic bets some.
09-10-2012, 03:27 PM
Interesting piece in the Los Angeles Times about USC victory over Syracuse. I didn't see the game, but apparently it wasn't a terribly impressive performance by USC against a very weak opponent. From the story: "The secondary seems disjointed. The offensive line is still finding its feet. The intensity is occasionally missing. The Trojans have enough dazzlers they need more grinders..."
http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/us...Trojans%29
http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/us...Trojans%29
Interesting piece in the Los Angeles Times about USC victory over Syracuse. I didn't see the game, but apparently it wasn't a terribly impressive performance by USC against a very weak opponent. From the story: "The secondary seems disjointed. The offensive line is still finding its feet. The intensity is occasionally missing. The Trojans have enough dazzlers they need more grinders..."
http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/us...Trojans%29
http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/us...Trojans%29
ChicagoCard
Unregistered
Unregistered
09-10-2012, 04:08 PM
By Bill Plaschke [ http://tinyurl.com/9fu2wr6 ] who seems a fair-minded columnist. Not sure entirely about some of those others on the sports page of the LA Times. Plaschke wrote a decent article on the overtime game at U.SC last season... (which I can't find on their web site).
By Bill Plaschke [ http://tinyurl.com/9fu2wr6 ] who seems a fair-minded columnist. Not sure entirely about some of those others on the sports page of the LA Times. Plaschke wrote a decent article on the overtime game at U.SC last season... (which I can't find on their web site).
09-10-2012, 04:23 PM
I have SC by <10. The basic situation for both teams reminds me a lot of last year, except with roles reversed. Unfortunately for us, we get them early rather than late. I think if we play them perfect or near-perfect we can win; I'm just not sure we're ready to play at that level yet.
I have SC by <10. The basic situation for both teams reminds me a lot of last year, except with roles reversed. Unfortunately for us, we get them early rather than late. I think if we play them perfect or near-perfect we can win; I'm just not sure we're ready to play at that level yet.
09-10-2012, 04:24 PM
I had a hard time deciding between Stanford by less than 10 and USC by less than 10, but finally decided on Stanford. The USC injuries (particularly the center) will make a difference. But the bigger reason is that Stanford seems to be improving rapidly, which makes sense early in the season for a team with new starters in key positions. Plus I'm generally an optimist. Stir all that together, and I think Stanford ekes out a win.
I had a hard time deciding between Stanford by less than 10 and USC by less than 10, but finally decided on Stanford. The USC injuries (particularly the center) will make a difference. But the bigger reason is that Stanford seems to be improving rapidly, which makes sense early in the season for a team with new starters in key positions. Plus I'm generally an optimist. Stir all that together, and I think Stanford ekes out a win.
09-10-2012, 09:05 PM
I think our defense - led by a ballistic Shayne Skov and the re-emergence of unstoppable Chase Thomas will step up big time to lead our effort and play inspired defense BUT our offense needs to keep the ball away from their offense. That means limit turnovers, a passing game to keep them honest and the re-emergence of our punishing running game to keep the ball and clock moving.
I think our defense - led by a ballistic Shayne Skov and the re-emergence of unstoppable Chase Thomas will step up big time to lead our effort and play inspired defense BUT our offense needs to keep the ball away from their offense. That means limit turnovers, a passing game to keep them honest and the re-emergence of our punishing running game to keep the ball and clock moving.
09-10-2012, 09:59 PM
I thought I was being a bit ridiculous when I clicked "Stanford by less than 10," and then I saw that most of us here are a bit ridiculous. The more I think about it, though, the more I think there's a chance...
Please clear the field! The game is not over!
Cardinal96
Unregistered
Unregistered
09-11-2012, 07:13 AM
(09-10-2012, 09:59 PM)Hank 91 link Wrote:I thought I was being a bit ridiculous when I clicked "Stanford by less than 10," and then I saw that most of us here are a bit ridiculous. The more I think about it, though, the more I think there's a chance...
That made me laugh. It reminded me of the scene from Dumb and Dumber when Lloyd said "So you're saying there's a chance....".
Nothing wrong with a little collective homerism when it comes to supporting our team.
(09-10-2012, 09:59 PM)Hank 91 link Wrote:I thought I was being a bit ridiculous when I clicked "Stanford by less than 10," and then I saw that most of us here are a bit ridiculous. The more I think about it, though, the more I think there's a chance...
That made me laugh. It reminded me of the scene from Dumb and Dumber when Lloyd said "So you're saying there's a chance....".
Nothing wrong with a little collective homerism when it comes to supporting our team.
ChicagoCard
Unregistered
Unregistered
09-11-2012, 08:57 AM
(09-11-2012, 07:31 AM)garvin link Wrote:Quote:By Bill Plaschke [ http://tinyurl.com/9fu2wr6 ] who seems a fair-minded columnist. Not sure entirely about some of those others on the sports page of the LA Times.
I laughed aloud when I saw this, Chicago Outsider. One of the CardBoard originals who has drifted away, Oasis, used to go frothing mad at any mention of Plaschke, who he referred to as the Minister of Propaganda at the U.S. version of Pravda. I thought Oasis was possibly a bit overboard on the subject, but Plaschke did produce some unduly harsh columns about Stanford in run-up to the 2000 Rose Bowl. And he wrote a downright stupid one the day after the game, which he portrayed as an easy Wisconsin victory over a hapless Stanford team that had no answer for Ron Dayne.
Dayne did gouge us for 200 yards, but that was about the only offense Wisconsin produced. They won 17-9, but we had the ball at the end and were driving for a TD that might have sent the game into overtime before Todd Husak slipped on a fourth-down play on a muddy field. It didn't look like all that easy a victory to me.
And it might be the case that that post of mine wasn't the only one that made you laugh out loud. I know you took offense to something I wrote a while back about the '99 Rose Bowl team which I apologized for, although not for my essential point, so I will stay out of that. I'm certain you have good reason for your perspective but his article on the U.SC overtime game last year was certainly fair and made a lot of U.SC-centric readers upset. I searched for it but couldn't find it (however I did happen to print to PDF at the time so do have it).
(09-11-2012, 07:31 AM)garvin link Wrote:Quote:By Bill Plaschke [ http://tinyurl.com/9fu2wr6 ] who seems a fair-minded columnist. Not sure entirely about some of those others on the sports page of the LA Times.
I laughed aloud when I saw this, Chicago Outsider. One of the CardBoard originals who has drifted away, Oasis, used to go frothing mad at any mention of Plaschke, who he referred to as the Minister of Propaganda at the U.S. version of Pravda. I thought Oasis was possibly a bit overboard on the subject, but Plaschke did produce some unduly harsh columns about Stanford in run-up to the 2000 Rose Bowl. And he wrote a downright stupid one the day after the game, which he portrayed as an easy Wisconsin victory over a hapless Stanford team that had no answer for Ron Dayne.
Dayne did gouge us for 200 yards, but that was about the only offense Wisconsin produced. They won 17-9, but we had the ball at the end and were driving for a TD that might have sent the game into overtime before Todd Husak slipped on a fourth-down play on a muddy field. It didn't look like all that easy a victory to me.
And it might be the case that that post of mine wasn't the only one that made you laugh out loud. I know you took offense to something I wrote a while back about the '99 Rose Bowl team which I apologized for, although not for my essential point, so I will stay out of that. I'm certain you have good reason for your perspective but his article on the U.SC overtime game last year was certainly fair and made a lot of U.SC-centric readers upset. I searched for it but couldn't find it (however I did happen to print to PDF at the time so do have it).
09-11-2012, 09:03 AM
After 2007, who can say a game against SC is hopeless?
I didn't do the math, but I think Syracuse backs ran for about 4 ypc. I watched the game, and the Orange QB was off target, so some passing yards were left on the field (and they had over 300).
SC is a strong team without any glaring weaknesses, but they don't have a dominating defense. I don't think Stanford can stop them, so it's going to take quite a bit of improvement from the running game and Nunes to have a shot. But I've seen enough from Nunes and the O-line to be optimistic that such improvements are possible.
I will actually be very disappointed if Stanford isn't within a touchdown after the end of three quarters. The team will probably need to force Barkley into some turnovers to actually win, but there's reason to believe that could also happen. I predict a high-scoring game with maybe Williamson kicking a game winner.
I didn't do the math, but I think Syracuse backs ran for about 4 ypc. I watched the game, and the Orange QB was off target, so some passing yards were left on the field (and they had over 300).
SC is a strong team without any glaring weaknesses, but they don't have a dominating defense. I don't think Stanford can stop them, so it's going to take quite a bit of improvement from the running game and Nunes to have a shot. But I've seen enough from Nunes and the O-line to be optimistic that such improvements are possible.
I will actually be very disappointed if Stanford isn't within a touchdown after the end of three quarters. The team will probably need to force Barkley into some turnovers to actually win, but there's reason to believe that could also happen. I predict a high-scoring game with maybe Williamson kicking a game winner.
After 2007, who can say a game against SC is hopeless?
I didn't do the math, but I think Syracuse backs ran for about 4 ypc. I watched the game, and the Orange QB was off target, so some passing yards were left on the field (and they had over 300).
SC is a strong team without any glaring weaknesses, but they don't have a dominating defense. I don't think Stanford can stop them, so it's going to take quite a bit of improvement from the running game and Nunes to have a shot. But I've seen enough from Nunes and the O-line to be optimistic that such improvements are possible.
I will actually be very disappointed if Stanford isn't within a touchdown after the end of three quarters. The team will probably need to force Barkley into some turnovers to actually win, but there's reason to believe that could also happen. I predict a high-scoring game with maybe Williamson kicking a game winner.
I didn't do the math, but I think Syracuse backs ran for about 4 ypc. I watched the game, and the Orange QB was off target, so some passing yards were left on the field (and they had over 300).
SC is a strong team without any glaring weaknesses, but they don't have a dominating defense. I don't think Stanford can stop them, so it's going to take quite a bit of improvement from the running game and Nunes to have a shot. But I've seen enough from Nunes and the O-line to be optimistic that such improvements are possible.
I will actually be very disappointed if Stanford isn't within a touchdown after the end of three quarters. The team will probably need to force Barkley into some turnovers to actually win, but there's reason to believe that could also happen. I predict a high-scoring game with maybe Williamson kicking a game winner.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »