Spread is up to UW +8
Comments
-
It's a bonus because you want it to be a bonus. Or we might have struggled because we aren't very good. If we blew out each team and played great, you would be talking about how strong of a team we have and what a difference Petersen has made. Just because we performed well under adversity against weak teams doesn't mean we will against stronger teams. Was winning games against weak competition really rising to the occasion?Tequilla said:Hawaii: Lindquist turned into a deer in headlights in the 2nd half ... get any kind of offensive production in the 2nd half and you get a 2 score victory. If you get a 2 score victory on the road with your backup QB, you should be happy.
Eastern: That was a game full of missed opportunities and learning lessons. If that game is 59-31, nobody is saying shit about that game.
This team has had to deal with substantial adversity in 3 out of the 4 games so far and has responded each time. That's a little bonus attribute that we've earned out of this preseason schedule.
We still don't know anything really other than what Derek wrote in his article that this team isn't good enough to just show up. We are a decent team that if we get a little luck and are solid can win 10 or 11 (counting the bowl) games. We are also a flawed team that could end up winning 8.
Stanford is a strong road team too. They have a very good program. Every loss they had the past few seasons was very close. Every loss you listed was a one score game. -
What state do you live in?HFNY said:Good analysis and I just saw that Javorious Allen had 23 carries for 154 yards against 'Furd (6.7 ypc).
Stanford also had a good amount of return yards against USC (no surprise since Sloppy Steve's unit gave up a return TD @ 'Furd last year).
I imagine Ross and Riva will be back. Riva's leg injury sounds more troubling but I can't imagine he won't go, especially with a bye after Stanford.
Decide to get some action going:
1. BET#: 448412494
STRAIGHT WAGER 09/23/14 16:20 EDT
Bet $ 460.00 to win $ 418.18 Result: Pending
Stanford vs Washington U 09/27/14 16:15 EDT Washington U +8 (-110)Tequilla said:Let the number continue to rise ...
Most right now are paying attention to the UW's results and not what Petersen is getting done underneath the results ...
I've seen just about every snap that we've taken this year (other than a few garbage time ones) and it's 100% obvious that Petersen is preparing his team to win this kind of game. And by winning this kind of game, I mean winning this kind of game without having to depend on lucky elements like Seven had to depend on to beat Stanford earlier this year. I'm talking about the kind of winning that is 100% driven by fundamentals, execution, and attention to detail in ALL THREE PHASES of the game.
The other elephant in the room is that Stanford is a great road team. Not necessarily the case once they lost Andrew Luck:
2013: 3-2 (won @ WSU, @ OSU (by 8), and @ ASU for conference title; lost @ Utah and @ USC)
2012: 4-1 (won @ Cal, @ Colorado, @ Oregon, @ UCLA; lost @ Washington); also lost @ ND
If you take the dreckfest out of those games (WSU, Colorado, and Cal still being rated too high), Stanford's point totals in those games are 13 (@ UW), 13 (@ ND), 17 (@ Oregon), 35 (@ UCLA), 21 (@ Utah), 20 (@ Oregon St), 17 (@ USC), and 38 (@ Arizona St). Bottom line is that Stanford is far from an offensive juggernaut on the road and in fact, 75% of the time in the last 2 years they've produced 20 or less points and have lost 50% of their games.
Like I said, I like the Dawgs 23-17. -
Shoulda, woulda, coulda ...Tequilla said:Hawaii: Lindquist turned into a deer in headlights in the 2nd half ... get any kind of offensive production in the 2nd half and you get a 2 score victory. If you get a 2 score victory on the road with your backup QB, you should be happy.
Eastern: That was a game full of missed opportunities and learning lessons. If that game is 59-31, nobody is saying shit about that game.
This team has had to deal with substantial adversity in 3 out of the 4 games so far and has responded each time. That's a little bonus attribute that we've earned out of this preseason schedule. -
I hope it goes well, but I'm just all over the place with this team right now. A little bit schizo.
-
The benefit of this schedule was that the learning lessons that we have gone through were against teams that we could still recover from and beat. I'm completely chalking up the Georgia State game to disinterest and taking the opposition for granted. They performed in the 2nd half as you'd expect them to against that caliber of team - so I'm ok with it.RoadDawg55 said:
It's a bonus because you want it to be a bonus. Or we might have struggled because we aren't very good. If we blew out each team and played great, you would be talking about how strong of a team we have and what a difference Petersen has made. Just because we performed well under adversity against weak teams doesn't mean we will against stronger teams. Was winning games against weak competition really rising to the occasion?Tequilla said:Hawaii: Lindquist turned into a deer in headlights in the 2nd half ... get any kind of offensive production in the 2nd half and you get a 2 score victory. If you get a 2 score victory on the road with your backup QB, you should be happy.
Eastern: That was a game full of missed opportunities and learning lessons. If that game is 59-31, nobody is saying shit about that game.
This team has had to deal with substantial adversity in 3 out of the 4 games so far and has responded each time. That's a little bonus attribute that we've earned out of this preseason schedule.
We still don't know anything really other than what Derek wrote in his article that this team isn't good enough to just show up. We are a decent team that if we get a little luck and are solid can win 10 or 11 (counting the bowl) games. We are also a flawed team that could end up winning 8.
Stanford is a strong road team too. They have a very good program. Every loss they had the past few seasons was very close. Every loss you listed was a one score game.
The only game I'm somewhat disappointed in was the Hawaii game because I was expecting Lindquist to play better. What he basically showed in that game was that we're in real trouble if Miles gets hurt - which in turn limits the offense a bit because we have to be a little smarter about how often we run him (I don't think it's a coincidence that we're seeing Lindquist playing in spots now where we want to dial up a QB run because the threat of him throwing the ball is still enough for it to be better than a straight wildcat type of situation but it allows us to be smarter about when/how Miles runs).
Eastern I thought we learned a couple of great lessons. First, the offense executed at a very sound level with Miles in charge. Second, we jumped on a team early and thought we could front run the rest of the way against a team that while inferior to us, was still a dangerous opponent that could hurt us if we dropped our attention. Great lesson for the team. Also, a number of defensive letdowns took place in the game due to either being mentally soft or not capitalizing on plays where opportunities were there. The game was more 59-31 than it was 59-52 ... but credit to Eastern for making some plays.
Illinois was easily our most complete game so far where we basically dominated them for the first half and then ran clock for the second half. This is the game that I'd point to as the primer for what this team is capable of.
We know that there are a lot of good players out there on this team. We know that there are growing pains that we've already gone through and more that we'll see during the year. I'm not saying that we'll always respond well to adversity and win games when faced with it. However, I'm far more willing to embrace a team that is capable of responding against it than a team that hasn't proven how to respond.
We've shown that we have a coach capable of making adjustments as they've been critical against Hawaii, Eastern, and Georgia State defensively.
We've shown that our attention to detail on special teams is far better than in previous seasons as it is not only creating positive field position for us, but also creating turnovers.
And finally, we've so far shown an ability to protect the football while also finding opportunities to change field position by creating turnovers. This is often a hallmark of a good football team.
There are signs there that we're the kind of football team that we all thought we'd see before the season ... however, the results have presented more of a cloudy picture on that. -
And while I agree that Stanford has a good program and surely isn't a bad road team, their results don't suggest that they are an elite road team. Further, the style of play that they play is far more conducive to lower scoring, one score type of games win or lose.
Ultimately, winning or losing against Stanford is often driven by which team executes better, makes less mistakes, and wins the special teams battle. -
He's not PDX bad...but close.EsophagealFeces said:
You are so bad at this. It's really fucking sad.oregonblitzkrieg said:
I was impressed by the Hawaii/EWU games. That kind of preparation should really put you in a position to beat Stanford.Tequilla said:I've seen just about every snap that we've taken this year (other than a few garbage time ones) and it's 100% obvious that Petersen is preparing his team to win this kind of game.
-
I don't follow betting lines, but I'm guessing UW hasn't beat the spread yet in 2014. Is that right?
I'm on board with the idea that they haven't shown the full arsenal yet and that the coaches and players have been approaching the first four weeks as scrimmages. That still leaves me in show me mode. I think we can beat Stanford but I haven't seen enough yet to risk any of my drug and hooker money on it. -
If our defense shows up and we don't give up any long bombs there is a chance to win. Unfortunately we will give up at least one long bomb and I don't think our offense will do anything against their defense.
Losing Price, Smith, ASJ, Stringfellow and Kasen not being 100% is huge. Mickens can't even stretch the cupcake teams vertically. The blocking is much worse. Last year it was great bc you had ASJ on the edge with Smith and Kasen who could spring Mickens. Also we no longer have Sankey, who was the best back in the country.
Last year we were riding high in front running Sark fashion and had our best performance of the year, almost beating a top 5 team on the road. It would have been the program's best win since 2000 Miami or 2002 WSU (as far as how good the opponent was).
Stanford lost a lot and we have home field but we really are a shell of that team and Stanford is mostly intact though not as good as they were. The front 7 has to step up and control the game and we need to win the turnover battle to have a realistic shot. It will be a similar game to 2012 but we don't have the game breakers like we had then to win that game. Ross is clearly not 100%. -
Hey, save it for the poadcastHeretoBeatmyChest said:If our defense shows up and we don't give up any long bombs there is a chance to win. Unfortunately we will give up at least one long bomb and I don't think our offense will do anything against their defense.
Losing Price, Smith, ASJ, Stringfellow and Kasen not being 100% is huge. Mickens can't even stretch the cupcake teams vertically. The blocking is much worse. Last year it was great bc you had ASJ on the edge with Smith and Kasen who could spring Mickens. Also we no longer have Sankey, who was the best back in the country.
Last year we were riding high in front running Sark fashion and had our best performance of the year, almost beating a top 5 team on the road. It would have been the program's best win since 2000 Miami or 2002 WSU (as far as how good the opponent was).
Stanford lost a lot and we have home field but we really are a shell of that team and Stanford is mostly intact though not as good as they were. The front 7 has to step up and control the game and we need to win the turnover battle to have a realistic shot. It will be a similar game to 2012 but we don't have the game breakers like we had then to win that game. Ross is clearly not 100%.
