Stanford

[425cougfan]

sucks. Especially with their third-string QB.

And in case anyone thinks I would only complain about Mowins because she's a woman, I'd almost rather listen to her than Pat McAfee. Hasselbeck isn't outstanding either, and McAfee will never shut up, rendering the whole broadcast sounding completely like amateur hour.

 

[dgibbons]

sucks. Especially with their third-string QB.

And in case anyone thinks I would only complain about Mowins because she's a woman, I'd almost rather listen to her than Pat McAfee. Hasselbeck isn't outstanding either, and McAfee will never shut up, rendering the whole broadcast sounding completely like amateur hour.

Molly McGrath is the star of that show.

 

[walzuu]

Molly McGrath is the star of that show.

To be fair She’s the star every Thursday night

 

[M-I-Coug]

"Yards"! distinctively Mowins signature.

 

[Cougatron]

I told people Stanford probably will miss a bowl game.

They still have to play Notre Dame, Cal and us. If they lose those 3 Stanford is not bowling this year.

 

[earldacoug]

sucks. Especially with their third-string QB.

And in case anyone thinks I would only complain about Mowins because she's a woman, I'd almost rather listen to her than Pat McAfee. Hasselbeck isn't outstanding either, and McAfee will never shut up, rendering the whole broadcast sounding completely like amateur hour.

I don’t understand why tv commentators think they need to fill every second of air time with noise and babble. Drives me nuts too.

 

[Fab5Coug]

I told people Stanford probably will miss a bowl game.

They still have to play Notre Dame, Cal and us. If they lose those 3 Stanford is not bowling this year.

I was probably on the opposite side of that debate. I bought into Stanford until I saw otherwise.

Was thinking after they knocked off UW, I may end up partially right. Figured they could still knock off UCLA, CU, then maybe Zona and us, or maybe surprise Cal, win a bowl game and still end up around 8 wins.

How wild is the Pac12 this year. How does a team knock off UW, then lose to UCLA the following week? Unfortunately, from a national perspective, it makes the conference look weak. To me though, it makes it really fun.

 

[ShockandAweWSU]

I'm not a big fan of David Shaw and his passing yards are for Losers comment. Guy is the most conservative coach in the country. Happy to see Stanford falling apart. Hard to win w/o a good quarterback.

 

[dgibbons]

I'm not a big fan of David Shaw and his passing yards are for Losers comment. Guy is the most conservative coach in the country. Happy to see Stanford falling apart. Hard to win w/o a good quarterback.

On paper, Stanford gets one every year.

 

[425cougfan]

I was probably on the opposite side of that debate. I bought into Stanford until I saw otherwise.

Was thinking after they knocked off UW, I may end up partially right. Figured they could still knock off UCLA, CU, then maybe Zona and us, or maybe surprise Cal, win a bowl game and still end up around 8 wins.

How wild is the Pac12 this year. How does a team knock off UW, then lose to UCLA the following week? Unfortunately, from a national perspective, it makes the conference look weak. To me though, it makes it really fun.

It's unfortunate, but undebatable, that most judge a conference's strength on whether it has a small number of powerhouses nationally, not on how good the conference is top to bottom. I think it's more interesting to have teams who give each other good games throughout the schedule than to have the powerhouses roll in and paste other conference teams by 30 points on the road, as we see in the other P5 conferences. Whee, the SEC is awesome because Auburn can go to Arkansas and beat them by 20. Of course, the SEC also is good when the Gamecocks can take down Georgia, apparently.

Of course, if the reason Pac-12 teams are giving each other good games isn't because the middle and lower portion of the conference is that good, but instead because the top teams are flawed and not close to the level of national contenders, that contributes to the perception that the conference is weak.

 

[425cougfan]

On paper, Stanford gets one every year.

Nobody was talking much about it, but when Mills took over for Costello, it likely was an upgrade. He was a 5-star prospect and the #1 overall pro-style QB recruit.

 

[PINGDUDE4]

I'm not a big fan of David Shaw and his passing yards are for Losers comment. Guy is the most conservative coach in the country. Happy to see Stanford falling apart. Hard to win w/o a good quarterback.

Whatever he is doing it seems to get a ton of his skill players injured. Seems like he loses at least one QB every year and his running backs are continually getting hurt.

Also I really do not understand UCLA, they are by far the best 2-5 team in memory. Watching their dominance last night and thinking without the WSU melt down that would have been their first win of the season is mind boggling.

 

[ShockandAweWSU]

On paper, Stanford gets one every year.

You are so right. Shaw and Tavita Pritchard get lots of great qbs, but then can't develop them.

 

[cougarhawk1]

well for one thing their qb usually scrambles and runs a lot, theres your injuries-Stanford is always physical

 

[metprof]

It's unfortunate, but undebatable, that most judge a conference's strength on whether it has a small number of powerhouses nationally, not on how good the conference is top to bottom. I think it's more interesting to have teams who give each other good games throughout the schedule than to have the powerhouses roll in and paste other conference teams by 30 points on the road, as we see in the other P5 conferences. Whee, the SEC is awesome because Auburn can go to Arkansas and beat them by 20. Of course, the SEC also is good when the Gamecocks can take down Georgia, apparently.

Of course, if the reason Pac-12 teams are giving each other good games isn't because the middle and lower portion of the conference is that good, but instead because the top teams are flawed and not close to the level of national contenders, that contributes to the perception that the conference is weak.

What?? You don't get a kick out of watching Ohio State beat Rutgers into unconsciousness?

 

[cr8zyncalif]

Stanford seems to be in decline. Whether temporary or permanent, I don't know. I did not expect them to be as bad as they looked last night. Their weak O with the distant back up QB does not fully explain their D problems....almost exactly what you can say about us. I think I see our D improving. We'll have to wait until next week to see if Stanford's D bounces back.

 

[OrangeGravy]

Nobody was talking much about it, but when Mills took over for Costello, it likely was an upgrade. He was a 5-star prospect and the #1 overall pro-style QB recruit.

View embedded media

I think QB evaluation is extremely difficult from one level to the next. It's the position with the most "misses" in football. I don't know what it is about that position that causes so much trouble for coaches. It could be due to how different the game is from High School--College--NFL or the difficulty in really being able to evaluate a QBs mental capacity for the game or who knows what. Very few can't miss prospects pan out. Look at how many really good college QBs end up total shit in the NFL. At this point, I expect any highly touted recruit or draft pick in that position to be shit until proven otherwise.