Why will this be different?

Gladstone said:

EwaDawg said:

Gladstone said:

Every marquee game the past fifteen years we have shat the bed. What is it about this team and staff that makes it different?

Stanford by 10. Prove me wrong, Pete.

(how do you have a marquee game if you are not a marquee team?)

Stanford. USC twice. Bowel game against classy team from Nebraska.

I am much more worried about Peterman's 3-6 record, at home, against conference opponents.

Seriously. 3-6 at home. FYFMFE.

They can only be assessed in hindsight, of course. Did those USC or Stanford wins propel the team into the upper tier of the Pac-12? No. Using my own logic we won't know for sure until seasons' end, but it damn well feels like it now. I like to fuck my cat.

A turning point can not be assessed until there is a body of work on either side. Maybe we had that turning point last game. Maybe this is the real turning point Friday. Maybe we don't have a turning point and we stay the same. Obviously the last few turning points were all duds. Realistically turning points are where you start to get incremental progress in the right direction and continue down that route. Not two steps forward, three steps to the side, then two back.

Mad_Son said:

Gladstone said:

EwaDawg said:

Gladstone said:

Every marquee game the past fifteen years we have shat the bed. What is it about this team and staff that makes it different?

Stanford by 10. Prove me wrong, Pete.

(how do you have a marquee game if you are not a marquee team?)

Stanford. USC twice. Bowel game against classy team from Nebraska.

I am much more worried about Peterman's 3-6 record, at home, against conference opponents.

Seriously. 3-6 at home. FYFMFE.

They can only be assessed in hindsight, of course. Did those USC or Stanford wins propel the team into the upper tier of the Pac-12? No. Using my own logic we won't know for sure until seasons' end, but it damn well feels like it now. I like to fuck my cat.

A turning point can not be assessed until there is a body of work on either side. Maybe we had that turning point last game. Maybe this is the real turning point Friday. Maybe we don't have a turning point and we stay the same. Obviously the last few turning points were all duds. Realistically turning points are where you start to get incremental progress in the right direction and continue down that route. Not two steps forward, three steps to the side, then two back.

If you go back to 1990, it's a very similar situation to what we have now. The 1989 team finished the season strong and went into the year with a lot of expectations. They started the 1990 season with a blah win over San Jose St and then an indifferent win at Purdue. Then we blew out #5 USC 31-0.

IF we see a similar situation Friday, then like the 1990 season, you knew you had the turning point at that time.

IF we see a narrow win, we still won't truly know because I think that there's a lot of question as to how good Stanford is. Like the Arizona win, finding a way to win on the road is a huge step for the program as would be beating Stanford in a game where eyeballs and expectations are there. But the win over Arizona only proves progress if we beat Stanford ... and if we beat Stanford the next hurdle of progress is beating Oregon.

I've said since before the season that this team has the talent to get to 3-0 going into the bye. I still think that that's very possible. IF that happens, to me the true turning point of where we are as a program would be how we handle the NEXT 3 game stretch against the Beavers, @Utah, and @Cal.

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

Tequilla said:

Mad_Son said:

Gladstone said:

EwaDawg said:

Gladstone said:

Every marquee game the past fifteen years we have shat the bed. What is it about this team and staff that makes it different?

Stanford by 10. Prove me wrong, Pete.

(how do you have a marquee game if you are not a marquee team?)

Stanford. USC twice. Bowel game against classy team from Nebraska.

I am much more worried about Peterman's 3-6 record, at home, against conference opponents.

Seriously. 3-6 at home. FYFMFE.

They can only be assessed in hindsight, of course. Did those USC or Stanford wins propel the team into the upper tier of the Pac-12? No. Using my own logic we won't know for sure until seasons' end, but it damn well feels like it now. I like to fuck my cat.

A turning point can not be assessed until there is a body of work on either side. Maybe we had that turning point last game. Maybe this is the real turning point Friday. Maybe we don't have a turning point and we stay the same. Obviously the last few turning points were all duds. Realistically turning points are where you start to get incremental progress in the right direction and continue down that route. Not two steps forward, three steps to the side, then two back.

If you go back to 1990, it's a very similar situation to what we have now. The 1989 team finished the season strong and went into the year with a lot of expectations. They started the 1990 season with a blah win over San Jose St and then an indifferent win at Purdue. Then we blew out #5 USC 31-0.

IF we see a similar situation Friday, then like the 1990 season, you knew you had the turning point at that time.

IF we see a narrow win, we still won't truly know because I think that there's a lot of question as to how good Stanford is. Like the Arizona win, finding a way to win on the road is a huge step for the program as would be beating Stanford in a game where eyeballs and expectations are there. But the win over Arizona only proves progress if we beat Stanford ... and if we beat Stanford the next hurdle of progress is beating Oregon.

I've said since before the season that this team has the talent to get to 3-0 going into the bye. I still think that that's very possible. IF that happens, to me the true turning point of where we are as a program would be how we handle the NEXT 3 game stretch against the Beavers, @Utah, and @Cal.

1990's defense was more death row than 2016's.

Both have potential to be elite PAC defenses ... this defense is in a position where they are learning how to be elite. The big miss on this defense is having solid options on both rush ends. Only Mathis is an average or better edge rusher in the conference.