[Redrum]

If ever a team was ripe for a loss,  we\'re it.    ND at home is a different animal...at least if it\'s Notre Dame--at home-- with no Charlie Weis-- and the opponent isn\'t Syracuse.  

What really bugs me is that opposing fans and the commentariat make so much of ND fans just gushing negativity about their team\'s season.   They take this as some sort of evidence that ND is lousy.  What they forget is that ND fans have gushed negativity since their last NC under Holtz (1988?) and even then they were carping and moaning.

We\'ll be lucky to get out of there with a W.    

[Redrum]

If ever a team was ripe for a loss,  we\'re it.    ND at home is a different animal...at least if it\'s Notre Dame--at home-- with no Charlie Weis-- and the opponent isn\'t Syracuse.  

What really bugs me is that opposing fans and the commentariat make so much of ND fans just gushing negativity about their team\'s season.   They take this as some sort of evidence that ND is lousy.  What they forget is that ND fans have gushed negativity since their last NC under Holtz (1988?) and even then they were carping and moaning.

We\'ll be lucky to get out of there with a W.    

[washingtonismoney]

I don\'t see the claim that Notre Dame\'s defense has been good. It gives up 5.7 yrds/play. By way of comparison UCLA\'s defense gives up 5.2 yrds/play. The three teams it\'s faced--Purdue, Michigan, and Michigan State--have such wildly different styles and quality that I think it\'s safe to say this is their true level.

[washingtonismoney]

I don\'t see the claim that Notre Dame\'s defense has been good. It gives up 5.7 yrds/play. By way of comparison UCLA\'s defense gives up 5.2 yrds/play. The three teams it\'s faced--Purdue, Michigan, and Michigan State--have such wildly different styles and quality that I think it\'s safe to say this is their true level.

[slide]

Garvin -- I have seen ND play a couple of times this year.  very good offensively, but so-so defensively with a weakness at S.  Zeke Motta (a former Stanford recruit) has been picked on quite a bit.  Crist and their passing game worry me.  if we don\'t harass him (he gets nervous feet), it will be a long day for us.

[slide]

Garvin -- I have seen ND play a couple of times this year.  very good offensively, but so-so defensively with a weakness at S.  Zeke Motta (a former Stanford recruit) has been picked on quite a bit.  Crist and their passing game worry me.  if we don\'t harass him (he gets nervous feet), it will be a long day for us.

[jayasena]

This will be our first test against a decent passing attack. I think if Luck doesn\'t have an off day we can still score enough to pull it off. But a sub-par day for the offense could make this rather unpleasant.

I\'m also hoping Kelly is above Weis-era tactics like extra-long grass on the field (and even if he weren\'t, Stanford is hopefully not worth such trouble in their opinion).

[jayasena]

This will be our first test against a decent passing attack. I think if Luck doesn\'t have an off day we can still score enough to pull it off. But a sub-par day for the offense could make this rather unpleasant.

I\'m also hoping Kelly is above Weis-era tactics like extra-long grass on the field (and even if he weren\'t, Stanford is hopefully not worth such trouble in their opinion).

[Pastor]

OK, let\'s see what we really think....

I\'ll start SU +10 or more.  I fear not the gnome (unless they come out in black unis with all that mojo)

[Pastor]

OK, let\'s see what we really think....

I\'ll start SU +10 or more.  I fear not the gnome (unless they come out in black unis with all that mojo)

[Leftcoast]

I get it.  Stanford fans are a cautious group.  If you worry about every game you\'ll eventually be right - and over the last decade you\'ll MOSTLY be right.  I get that.  

BUT .... If you are ever going to take a chance on being "irrationally exuberant" isn\'t now the time?  

I hope the team goes in ready to do battle and feeling paranoid but for my part, I\'ll take a note from the early Booty and say, "We roll these guys."

(All of which is my way of admitting I\'m the idiot who pulled the 21+ lever.)

[Leftcoast]

I get it.  Stanford fans are a cautious group.  If you worry about every game you\'ll eventually be right - and over the last decade you\'ll MOSTLY be right.  I get that.  

BUT .... If you are ever going to take a chance on being "irrationally exuberant" isn\'t now the time?  

I hope the team goes in ready to do battle and feeling paranoid but for my part, I\'ll take a note from the early Booty and say, "We roll these guys."

(All of which is my way of admitting I\'m the idiot who pulled the 21+ lever.)

[fullmetal]

I\'m going with SU +1 or more because I\'ll be right if we win by any amount.

Yeah, the close loss thing does tell me that this isn\'t a patsy.  And let\'s face it, Stanford\'s last three opponents have been kind of patsy-ish, with the exception of UCLA, which I could read either way--I mean, what if I knew UCLA would upset Texas (which it won\'t, I think)--would I go for +21 or more?

I\'m cautious, but optimistic.  The pass rush needs to plant a Dayne Crist tree in the middle of that stadium, watered with the tears of deluded Notre Dame faithful.  I\'m primarily keyed on our defense performing--I think the offense, despite possibly missing the #1 receiver, will be okay.  RBBC will be good to present change-of-pace match-ups.  Does Stanford have a hurry-up package?  Let\'s do that, all day.

Screw that, let\'s play the WISHBONE.  We have a very special OL, a running QB, a stud fullback and many decent tailbacks.  ND will never see it coming.

[fullmetal]

I\'m going with SU +1 or more because I\'ll be right if we win by any amount.

Yeah, the close loss thing does tell me that this isn\'t a patsy.  And let\'s face it, Stanford\'s last three opponents have been kind of patsy-ish, with the exception of UCLA, which I could read either way--I mean, what if I knew UCLA would upset Texas (which it won\'t, I think)--would I go for +21 or more?

I\'m cautious, but optimistic.  The pass rush needs to plant a Dayne Crist tree in the middle of that stadium, watered with the tears of deluded Notre Dame faithful.  I\'m primarily keyed on our defense performing--I think the offense, despite possibly missing the #1 receiver, will be okay.  RBBC will be good to present change-of-pace match-ups.  Does Stanford have a hurry-up package?  Let\'s do that, all day.

Screw that, let\'s play the WISHBONE.  We have a very special OL, a running QB, a stud fullback and many decent tailbacks.  ND will never see it coming.

[Farm93]

BUT .... If you are ever going to take a chance on being "irrationally exuberant" isn\'t now the time?

I think I have a problem with the irrationally part.  Let\'s review the morning in the world of ESPN.  On ESPN - Kiper and his kind declared that Jake has dropped and Luck has moved up on the board, if Luck leaves for the NFL of course.   On ESPN.com Kiper also projects Luck as the #1 underclassman QB.  On ESPN2 - Luck was featured throughout the morning loop, and he was described as the QB most likely to succeed in the NFL.  On the ESPN Pac-10 Blog Miller predicts Stanford will win by 13 points.  Oh, yeah, and Stanford is on the front page of the ESPN.com college football page today.

Now, historically the members of the various Pac-10 boards have grumbled that the Pac-10 gets virtually no love from the media, especially if the school is not USC.

If true, then I would submit that irrational exuberance would need to include expectations above and beyond those noted by ESPN.

FWIW - I am with Miller and therefore I opted for a 10+ point win.

For those doomsday types, I might submit that getting served a big "L" this weekend could be best.  With a "W" the team may get too far ahead of itself and then get blasted at Oregon, certainly a fear the cautious would present after a win in South Bend.   And yet with a loss to ND, the team may have the proper perspective and focus to upset an overconfident Oregon team.  And in the team\'s quest for the conference championship, a W against Oregon is key.

[Farm93]

BUT .... If you are ever going to take a chance on being "irrationally exuberant" isn\'t now the time?

I think I have a problem with the irrationally part.  Let\'s review the morning in the world of ESPN.  On ESPN - Kiper and his kind declared that Jake has dropped and Luck has moved up on the board, if Luck leaves for the NFL of course.   On ESPN.com Kiper also projects Luck as the #1 underclassman QB.  On ESPN2 - Luck was featured throughout the morning loop, and he was described as the QB most likely to succeed in the NFL.  On the ESPN Pac-10 Blog Miller predicts Stanford will win by 13 points.  Oh, yeah, and Stanford is on the front page of the ESPN.com college football page today.

Now, historically the members of the various Pac-10 boards have grumbled that the Pac-10 gets virtually no love from the media, especially if the school is not USC.

If true, then I would submit that irrational exuberance would need to include expectations above and beyond those noted by ESPN.

FWIW - I am with Miller and therefore I opted for a 10+ point win.

For those doomsday types, I might submit that getting served a big "L" this weekend could be best.  With a "W" the team may get too far ahead of itself and then get blasted at Oregon, certainly a fear the cautious would present after a win in South Bend.   And yet with a loss to ND, the team may have the proper perspective and focus to upset an overconfident Oregon team.  And in the team\'s quest for the conference championship, a W against Oregon is key.

[fullmetal]

WRT to Rose Bowl hopes, I\'ll take a non-conference loss over a conference loss.  It\'s just painful that such a hypothetical would come against a traditional rival.

Simple solution: just beat \'em.

[fullmetal]

WRT to Rose Bowl hopes, I\'ll take a non-conference loss over a conference loss.  It\'s just painful that such a hypothetical would come against a traditional rival.

Simple solution: just beat \'em.

[Leftcoast]

Uh ... Garvin?   We seem to have some "late" voting.   It\'s now 10.

[Leftcoast]

Uh ... Garvin?   We seem to have some "late" voting.   It\'s now 10.

[yvonne]

I\'ll go in and close the back-to-the-future poll, and make sure the current one is also for a restricted time.

[yvonne]

I\'ll go in and close the back-to-the-future poll, and make sure the current one is also for a restricted time.

[Robbie]

I\'ll stand up. I voted for 21+, but far more with my heart than my head. I wouldn\'t have put any money down on the idea.

[Robbie]

I\'ll stand up. I voted for 21+, but far more with my heart than my head. I wouldn\'t have put any money down on the idea.

[Leftcoast]

I\'m already on record as pulling the 21+ lever.   I really liked Stanford against Notre Dame after seeing a few of their games this year.  I\'m not nearly as confident this week.

Beat the Donald Ducks!

[Leftcoast]

I\'m already on record as pulling the 21+ lever.   I really liked Stanford against Notre Dame after seeing a few of their games this year.  I\'m not nearly as confident this week.

Beat the Donald Ducks!

[stanfan]

I like our chances, but it is going to be very tough from a match-up standpoint without M. Thomas, Whalen and Gaffney.  Any chance Patch will be back?

[stanfan]

I like our chances, but it is going to be very tough from a match-up standpoint without M. Thomas, Whalen and Gaffney.  Any chance Patch will be back?