What are the odds we beat Stanford?
Comments
-
81%. O/U is 5
-
I think we play Stanfraud in the gay area (lol) this yr.
-
I think the Dawgs win rather easily say 34-17?
-
I think Stanford is being overhyped. They were the conference champs last year but according to the advanced metrics they were ranked 9. Oregon was 2.
Also 10 of their 14 games last year were decided by 7 points or less. They obviously will have a strong defense but they lost their leading WR, Taylor, and all the TE's. I know Shaw is high on their running backs and Hogan will be decent behind that line but their pass game is going to struggle against good defenses.
They have the advantage on both lines but they did last year and still lost to us. Now we look like a much better team. If we are going to beat them it will be the same way as last year....we contain their run game just enough and we win because our skill guys make big plays. -
UW beats 'furd. I like to call them furd. I have no idea why. But it's like saying Frisco, which is also retarded.
-
Luck was X factor for their offense. With him @ QB they scored 28+ points in every game during the 2011 season.
In 2012 they only went over 28 4 times. And now minus out Taylor and Ertz, and I think they are going to be average at best on offense. Hogan gets a lot of hype when compared to Nunes, but I don't think he is going to go out and beat you with his arm.
Similar to last year, I think they play a lot of close games. Personally I think ASU is the tougher match up for us. -
I'll be there. Anyone else going?
-
On the other hand, their defense has gotten much better since Luck left. This is one of the best defenses in the country. They also have an OL full of seniors except for a 5 star sophomore at left tackle. Their first two guys off the bench on the OL are 5 star Sophomores. It doesn't matter that they lost Taylor, they will be able to pound the football. We have better skill guys, but I don't think their guys are quite as bad as some on here are making them out to be.IrishDawg22 said:Luck was X factor for their offense. With him @ QB they scored 28+ points in every game during the 2011 season.
In 2012 they only went over 28 4 times. And now minus out Taylor and Ertz, and I think they are going to be average at best on offense. Hogan gets a lot of hype when compared to Nunes, but I don't think he is going to go out and beat you with his arm.
Similar to last year, I think they play a lot of close games. Personally I think ASU is the tougher match up for us.
With it being a road game, I think it is more likely we get plungered then we beat them. They are going to destroy us on the line and I don't think our speed will be enough. They did fine against Oregon last year. It is a terrible match up for us despite beating them last year, and them not being explosive on offense. Look at the couple of years before last year... We got plungered every time, and last year was about the luckiest win I have ever seen outside of the 2009 Arizona game. Nunes and #88 gift wrapped it for us.
-
Furd is near Frisco, but further from Zona.MikeDamone said:UW beats 'furd. I like to call them furd. I have no idea why. But it's like saying Frisco, which is also retarded.
-
Furd and Frisco are in Cali
-
I don't get why so many(Doogs) think Stanford is an automatic loss. Yes I'm aware Sark sucks on the road(although Doogs never say that as why that's an auto loss). I think talent wise we are right there with Stanford.
I think our no huddle offense can give Stanford fits as Oregon has given them problems in three of the four years with that same offense. -
Furd will lose 3 games this year. Furd will only average 24-26 pts/game in the Pac games. Yes, Hogan has no greats to throw to. After what happened to BSU, UW looks like it could match up well against Furd.
-
can we worry about Illinois first?
-
Can we just enjoy being 1-0?dhdawg said:can we worry about Illinois first?
-
I feel it is a very likely loss, but I do see where you are coming from. The problem is, Stanford's OL and DL's are astoundingly better than ours. I will always take strong lines over skill guys, even if we have positioned our team for our skill guys to shine. If it was a home game, I would agree that it is a winnable game. I just don't see it on the road. Maybe if we start out 4-0 and all 4 games are comfortable wins, I might change my mind.He_Needs_More_Time said:I don't get why so many(Doogs) think Stanford is an automatic loss. Yes I'm aware Sark sucks on the road(although Doogs never say that as why that's an auto loss). I think talent wise we are right there with Stanford.
I think our no huddle offense can give Stanford fits as Oregon has given them problems in three of the four years with that same offense.
-
The game is away, and Stanford will be looking for revenge for last year. David Shaw will have a month worth of tape to study on us by then, and playing against up tempo is old to them.
We play Arizona the week before, so we might be a bit gassed. Stanford plays WSU the week before, which last year was a surprise but not likely to be overlooked this year. So Stanford will be better rested for a game that looks to be a tough one. Our DL will get stuffed.
Yes, all of us would have said this last year, and the 2012 win against Stanford was the shock of the year. But I can't see it happening two years in a row, especially 1. Because they have a solid QB now, and 2. It is in their house.
-
What's that tell you about advanced metrics? Stanford beat oregon in head to head play on the road last year, then went on to win the conference title and a Rose Bowl. Advanced metrics also says Ohio State shouldn't have played Miami in the 2002 MNC game, much less won it, but they did play the game and they did win it. Power football doesn't always translate to pretty statistics, but done right, it produces wins, ugly and pretty, especially pretty for those who like to see one team impose it's physical will on another.HeretoBeatmyChest said:I think Stanford is being overhyped. They were the conference champs last year but according to the advanced metrics they were ranked 9. Oregon was 2.
Also 10 of their 14 games last year were decided by 7 points or less. They obviously will have a strong defense but they lost their leading WR, Taylor, and all the TE's. I know Shaw is high on their running backs and Hogan will be decent behind that line but their pass game is going to struggle against good defenses.
They have the advantage on both lines but they did last year and still lost to us. Now we look like a much better team. If we are going to beat them it will be the same way as last year....we contain their run game just enough and we win because our skill guys make big plays.
We won't know what this year's version of Stanford is made of until they play a few games. The same is true of every other team in the conference including UW. However, Stanford had the best team in the conference last year, winning both the conference title and the Rose Bowl, and they've retained far more pieces from that team than they've lost. Based on how they finished last year and the key players they have returning I suspect they will be formidable, maybe as good or better than they were last year. It is likely there will be no team in the PAC that can match them along the line of scrimmage, and it is also likely that they will have the best front seven on defense in the conference. If those things pan out for them, they are going to be very tough, and with their schedule, playing their toughest opponents at home, they will be in great shape to win another conference title.
Odds of beating them? Maybe 19% .... or better yet, LIPO -
You are wise beyond your yearsRoadDawg55 said:
I feel it is a very likely loss, but I do see where you are coming from. The problem is, Stanford's OL and DL's are astoundingly better than ours. I will always take strong lines over skill guys, even if we have positioned our team for our skill guys to shine. If it was a home game, I would agree that it is a winnable game. I just don't see it on the road. Maybe if we start out 4-0 and all 4 games are comfortable wins, I might change my mind.He_Needs_More_Time said:I don't get why so many(Doogs) think Stanford is an automatic loss. Yes I'm aware Sark sucks on the road(although Doogs never say that as why that's an auto loss). I think talent wise we are right there with Stanford.
I think our no huddle offense can give Stanford fits as Oregon has given them problems in three of the four years with that same offense.
-
Stanford wins this game 8 out of 10 times even though we don't know much about either team yet.
-
I believe the correct answer is 8.1 times out 10.TierbsHsotBoobs said:Stanford wins this game 8 out of 10 times even though we don't know much about either team yet.
-
I'd pick Stanford too but that is mainly due to Sark's road record.
However, the Sark supporters(doogs) chalk up Stanford as an automatic loss yet they won't bring up Sark's road record. It's always "You can't expect to beat a Stanford yet". Why not? We beat them last year with a much worse team.
Stanford isn't exactly a hostile environment either. -
No way. We are ranked 20th now. It is clearly 8.04 times out of 10. A dude ran it on his computer!Southerndawg said:
I believe the correct answer is 8.1 times out 10.
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
