[CochinoJanks]

Is this happening again this year?

If it is, could I get a "refresher" post on the rules and scoring details, i.e. the date, time and label that the thread will open with?

If it doesn't happen, I understand that also.  I am sure it took considerable time and effort to compile all of the information from all of the predictions.

Thank you.

[CochinoJanks]

Is this happening again this year?

If it is, could I get a "refresher" post on the rules and scoring details, i.e. the date, time and label that the thread will open with?

If it doesn't happen, I understand that also.  I am sure it took considerable time and effort to compile all of the information from all of the predictions.

Thank you.

[Rally]

Is this happening again this year?

If it is, could I get a "refresher" post on the rules and scoring details, i.e. the date, time and label that the thread will open with?

If it doesn't happen, I understand that also.  I am sure it took considerable time and effort to compile all of the information from all of the predictions.

Thank you.

Me, too, please.

[Rally]

Is this happening again this year?

If it is, could I get a "refresher" post on the rules and scoring details, i.e. the date, time and label that the thread will open with?

If it doesn't happen, I understand that also.  I am sure it took considerable time and effort to compile all of the information from all of the predictions.

Thank you.

Me, too, please.

[Leftcoast]

What say you,Gauss & Publius?  Are you game for running this for yet another year?  If I remember correctly Gauss ran this last year with Publius occasionally pinch hitting for him in sending out reminders.

Anyway, I thought it was great fun :) and so did most others despite the infrequent grumbling over the scoring method.

[Leftcoast]

What say you,Gauss & Publius?  Are you game for running this for yet another year?  If I remember correctly Gauss ran this last year with Publius occasionally pinch hitting for him in sending out reminders.

Anyway, I thought it was great fun :) and so did most others despite the infrequent grumbling over the scoring method.

[Rally]

What say you, Publius?  Are you game for running this for yet another year?

If so, please, for us newbies, the ground rules?

[Rally]

What say you, Publius?  Are you game for running this for yet another year?

If so, please, for us newbies, the ground rules?

[PrinceLightfoot]

If I remember correctly, we ended up following this formula: [Stanford predicted score - Stanford actual score] + [Opponent predicted score - Opponent actual score] = margin of error. The total number of points awarded is based on the number of players entering in a prediction for that week...i.e. 20 predictions, the person with the smallest margin of error gets 20 points, 2nd place gets 19 points, etc. There was a 10(?) point bonus if your score prediction was perfect and a 5(?) point penalty for picking against Stanford with the result being a Stanford win. Your weekly score would be added to the season-to-date totals.

[PrinceLightfoot]

If I remember correctly, we ended up following this formula: [Stanford predicted score - Stanford actual score] + [Opponent predicted score - Opponent actual score] = margin of error. The total number of points awarded is based on the number of players entering in a prediction for that week...i.e. 20 predictions, the person with the smallest margin of error gets 20 points, 2nd place gets 19 points, etc. There was a 10(?) point bonus if your score prediction was perfect and a 5(?) point penalty for picking against Stanford with the result being a Stanford win. Your weekly score would be added to the season-to-date totals.

[Farm93]

For this week's game (YES! to that idea) I predict Stanford 45 - UC Davis 10.

I suspect a first game will include a mistake or two that will lead to a few scores for UCD.

[Farm93]

For this week's game (YES! to that idea) I predict Stanford 45 - UC Davis 10.

I suspect a first game will include a mistake or two that will lead to a few scores for UCD.

[FarmBoy]

Stanford 28, Davis 10

[FarmBoy]

Stanford 28, Davis 10

[Renaissance Man]

Stanford 40, Davis 0

[Renaissance Man]

Stanford 40, Davis 0

[IdCard83]

My first time on the board but I will step right in and guess 38-7.

[IdCard83]

My first time on the board but I will step right in and guess 38-7.

[PrinceLightfoot]

My first time on the board but I will step right in and guess 38-7.

Welcome to The Board!

My prediction:
UC Davis - 0
The Good Guys - 55

[PrinceLightfoot]

My first time on the board but I will step right in and guess 38-7.

Welcome to The Board!

My prediction:
UC Davis - 0
The Good Guys - 55

[Papa John]

Stanford wins, 63-13. Because whenever I'm sad, I think of 63-13 and it cheers me up.

[Papa John]

Stanford wins, 63-13. Because whenever I'm sad, I think of 63-13 and it cheers me up.

[pcgoode]

52 to 20 for the good guys.  Big lead early enough in the game so that second and third team guys on D get some reps and make some mistakes, leading to a few scores by UC Davis.  First team OLine plays into fourth quarter to get some time to gel.

[pcgoode]

52 to 20 for the good guys.  Big lead early enough in the game so that second and third team guys on D get some reps and make some mistakes, leading to a few scores by UC Davis.  First team OLine plays into fourth quarter to get some time to gel.

[Canalejas]

Cardinal 48, Aggies 13

[Canalejas]

Cardinal 48, Aggies 13

[SUBuddha]

I am going to have to go with:

Stanford 47 (yes I am predicting a safety) Aggies 13. I think the line will give up some pressure early and our second stringers will give up at least one TD.

[SUBuddha]

I am going to have to go with:

Stanford 47 (yes I am predicting a safety) Aggies 13. I think the line will give up some pressure early and our second stringers will give up at least one TD.

[Rally]

31 - 3 favor Stanford.  I think we play very vanilla, trying out running backs and tight ends, but otherwise power.  No need to provide any more scouting tape than necessary, line needs the work, still evaluating RBs and TEs, and no need to risk injury.  UCDavis scores field goal late against threes.  This prediction gets blown up if we have big run backs or go to the wideouts deep very often, but I think this is a conservative game.  My hope?  RBs seperate themselves a bit, TEs live up to expectations, OL ones crush everything, no injuries.

[Rally]

31 - 3 favor Stanford.  I think we play very vanilla, trying out running backs and tight ends, but otherwise power.  No need to provide any more scouting tape than necessary, line needs the work, still evaluating RBs and TEs, and no need to risk injury.  UCDavis scores field goal late against threes.  This prediction gets blown up if we have big run backs or go to the wideouts deep very often, but I think this is a conservative game.  My hope?  RBs seperate themselves a bit, TEs live up to expectations, OL ones crush everything, no injuries.

[czaja]

42-10 to the good guys.  I think even with vanilla schemes our offense puts up a fair amount of points.  D looks goods and 3-4th stringers give up a late TD in the 4th.

[czaja]

42-10 to the good guys.  I think even with vanilla schemes our offense puts up a fair amount of points.  D looks goods and 3-4th stringers give up a late TD in the 4th.

[washingtonismoney]

43-16.

[washingtonismoney]

43-16.

[CornFed]

I don't think we'll be forced to start many series in the red zone, but those we do will not necessitate field goals.  Maybe we'll have a turnover early, which may lead to a field goal by the bad guys that ruins what would have been a shutout.  Dang!  Otherwise uneventful, hopefully, and we consciously avoid running up the score.  I'm thinking it will end up being about a 38-3 final.

[CornFed]

I don't think we'll be forced to start many series in the red zone, but those we do will not necessitate field goals.  Maybe we'll have a turnover early, which may lead to a field goal by the bad guys that ruins what would have been a shutout.  Dang!  Otherwise uneventful, hopefully, and we consciously avoid running up the score.  I'm thinking it will end up being about a 38-3 final.

[CrazedZooChimp]

We're forced to settle for a field goal early on, causing much wringing of hands.  Davis then manages to tie it, causing several fans to give up on the season.  We then score touchdowns on our next five possessions, finally allowing Davis to score against our 3rd string D late in the fourth.

38-10.  The game plan is pretty plain and boring on offense, and there is much partying in the backfield on defense.

[CrazedZooChimp]

We're forced to settle for a field goal early on, causing much wringing of hands.  Davis then manages to tie it, causing several fans to give up on the season.  We then score touchdowns on our next five possessions, finally allowing Davis to score against our 3rd string D late in the fourth.

38-10.  The game plan is pretty plain and boring on offense, and there is much partying in the backfield on defense.

[CTcard]

Does anyone here actually know anything about the Aggies?

------------------------------------------------
I don't know much, but tried to look up a few things.

They went 5-7 last year.
Their one FBS game was a 7-36 loss to Nevada (4-8 last year).
When they did win last year, they won by some big scores (34-7 vs Sac St, 34-18 vs NDak and NColo, 30-13 Id St, and 21-3 So.Utah).
They also tended to lose big. In fact, they only played one 1 score game (L 7-10 SDak) and one 2 score game (L 10-21 NAriz).

Their official outlook says they return 8 starters on offense and 6 on defense.
They return 2 all-Big Sky conference players: newcomer of the year and 3rd team RB Manzanares and third team K Stuart.
They lost their QB Wright, a four year starter. I cannot figure out if they have named a starter or not.

Their coach is Ron Gould, in his second year after being a long time assistant at C_a_l.
Last year they ran about 55% of the time - which is roughly the balance that USC had.
They averaged 344 yds/gm.
They averaged allowing 388 yds/gm.

All told, they don't seem to be a particularly good FCS team, though they do have a lot of returning starters. Their media guide says The Sports Network preseason ranking has them tied for 41st in FCS - that would be considerably better than last year I think.

------------------------
I take all of this to mean that Stanford wins by essentially whatever they want.
Given the past few openers, I don't think they'll be all that focused on a real big score.

So, Stanford 38 Aggies 10

[Accompanied by much weeping and gnashing of teeth about the lack of use of our true game-breakers, how weak the Oline looked, and "where's the pass rush"?]

[CTcard]

Does anyone here actually know anything about the Aggies?

------------------------------------------------
I don't know much, but tried to look up a few things.

They went 5-7 last year.
Their one FBS game was a 7-36 loss to Nevada (4-8 last year).
When they did win last year, they won by some big scores (34-7 vs Sac St, 34-18 vs NDak and NColo, 30-13 Id St, and 21-3 So.Utah).
They also tended to lose big. In fact, they only played one 1 score game (L 7-10 SDak) and one 2 score game (L 10-21 NAriz).

Their official outlook says they return 8 starters on offense and 6 on defense.
They return 2 all-Big Sky conference players: newcomer of the year and 3rd team RB Manzanares and third team K Stuart.
They lost their QB Wright, a four year starter. I cannot figure out if they have named a starter or not.

Their coach is Ron Gould, in his second year after being a long time assistant at C_a_l.
Last year they ran about 55% of the time - which is roughly the balance that USC had.
They averaged 344 yds/gm.
They averaged allowing 388 yds/gm.

All told, they don't seem to be a particularly good FCS team, though they do have a lot of returning starters. Their media guide says The Sports Network preseason ranking has them tied for 41st in FCS - that would be considerably better than last year I think.

------------------------
I take all of this to mean that Stanford wins by essentially whatever they want.
Given the past few openers, I don't think they'll be all that focused on a real big score.

So, Stanford 38 Aggies 10

[Accompanied by much weeping and gnashing of teeth about the lack of use of our true game-breakers, how weak the Oline looked, and "where's the pass rush"?]