- 01/11/2011, 02:21AM ET
Confucius. Trout said 01/11, 02:21 AM
I know I'll lose due to the semi-erotic man love this site has for Luck, but I don't care.
Stanford is in a gray area when it comes to how much national prestige they deserve, they didn't beat anyone who I would consider a great team, and beat only 2 pretty good teams (USC & VT)
You say they shut out 3 teams UCLA (4 w's), Oregon state(5 w's), and Washington (7 w's).
My favorite is UCLA which you claim proves something because UCLA beat up on Texas 2 weeks later. That's right, shutting out a 4-8 team who beat a 5-7 team, is apparently something to brag about.
Meanwhile you think scoring 70 3 times doesn't prove anything.
Of course, my favorite reasoning is this little gem.
"Wisconsin beat Iowa, a team that Arizona beat, a team that Stanford man handled. If you think Iowa is a quality win, than Arizona must be a huge win for the Cardinal."
Hold on a second, I'm trying to think of a way to connect that to Kevin Bacon.
I've got nothing.
Anyway, the game against Iowa was in Kinnick, won of the toughest places to play, against a team many considered a potential NC contender. Yeah, they lost to Arizona, and V-Tech lost to James Madison.
OM: 2010 Champs said 01/11, 02:38 AM
"They are way better than Stanford"
Glad to see you've backed off from your original claim. Unfortunately, you started your argument with the classic pity plea.
Anyways, Stanford is the only team in the nation to have shutout 3 AP-conference teams. 2 of those games being on the road, 1 of them, to a bowl team that beat Nebraska.
Scoring 70 points on the likes of Austin Peay, Indiana, and a Northwestern team without their best player, doesn't prove much to me. If shutting out 3 AP teams doesn't impress you, than putting up 70 on a FCS team and 2 AP teams doesn't impress me.
Stanford's best wins came vs USC and Arizona, and against VT in the Orange Bowl. 2 of those, were thorough BEAT DOWNS.
Wisconsin's best wins came vs Ohio State and, if you insist, @ Iowa. The Iowa game, by 1 point.
Stanford's only loss? @ Oregon, arguably the most difficult team to beat on the road in the country.
Wisconsin's 2 losses? @ Michigan State and vs TCU in the Rose Bowl.
If you ask me, Stanford's quality wins are more impressive and their single loss, less "demeaning" than Wisconsin's 2 losses.
I'll get to the Stanford vs Wisconsin on-field matchups in the next argument.
Confucius. Trout said 01/11, 07:44 PM
"Glad to see you've backed off from your original claim"
I often over exaggerate during conversations, take what I say with a grain of salt.. Besides, that's just splitting hairs.
I love Pac-10 football, but the conference isn't what it could be yet. And THIS year, it wasn't overly impressive
The 1 elite team Stanford faced ALL year, was Oregon. And they received quite a beat down. Wisconsin was not blown out in any game
You can say Arizona, USC, and VT were quality wins, but they weren't that good this year. And that undermanned USC teams TORCHED Stanford's questionable secondary
Wisconsin beat the #1 team in the nation (at the time) EASILY, they beat Iowa in Iowa (very tough to do, don't care what you say), and they scored 70 3 times
I'm not saying shutting out 3 teams isn't impressive, but scoring 70 3 times (twice against big 10 opponents) is much more impressive than shutting out 3 mediocre offenses
They lost to Michigan State, in week 5 on the road. Now, aren't you the one who claimed Stanford was a different team after they got blown out by Oregon also in week 5, so isn't it possible that Wisconsin was also a different team?
OM: 2010 Champs said 01/11, 08:17 PM
It is possible. But Stanford proved without question they were a different team going undefeated from that point on winning all but one game by double digits. Wisconsin lost a game, albeit to a great TCU team.
Anyways, lets examine this:
Wisconsin's best weapon on either side of the ball, is their 3-headed monster run game. They ranked 12th in the nation in rushing yards. Virginia Tech ranked 17th in the nation in rushing yards. Pretty comparable IMO. In the Orange Bowl, Stanford held VT to 66 rushing yards. I think it's pretty reasonable to say that Stanford's D would be able to hold Wisconsin to similarly low numbers rushing.
Wisconsin's defense, ranked 72nd in the nation with 23 sacks. Stanford's O-line, ranked 2nd in the nation in sacks allowed with only 6. Do you have any idea what would happen to the Wisconsin secondary if Luck were given that much time?
Meanwhile, Stanford was tied for 10th in sacks with 36. Wisconsin, allowed 14 sacks on just 276 passing attempts. And let's keep in mind, Wisconsin's O-line hasn't had to face a Defensive unit with more than 27 sacks this year. Tolzien, would be on his back all day, especially with the run game likely struggling
Confucius. Trout said 01/11, 08:38 PM
I get how you could think Wisconsin's loss coupled with Stanford's big W would hurts my argument, and it does to a certain extent, but you have to look at the games in perspective.
Wisconsin lost to a team that could be considered the best team in the nation, I think we both agree on that.
Stanford beat up a VT tea that wasn't that good.
And while we're on that subject, ARE YOU SERIOUS?! You're actually comparing VT's run game to Wisconsin's? Apples and oranges, who did VT face all year? Weak ACC teams. Wisconsin was going up against Big 11 D's, and while the Big 11 may not be what they used to be, they are still the 2nd/3rd best conference in the nation, depending on how you look at it.
Speaking of Tolzein, he's someone we haven't talked about. He completed 73% of his passes this season, and he'd be going up against Stanford's secondary. Their pass rush is good, but it isn't good enough to hide their weaknesses. If Wisconsin can get a good balance going, no team could beat them.
And Stanford won't stuff Wisconsin's running game, you'd be crazy to think they could. Even TCU and Michigan State couldn't hold them below 150. And TCU gave up 226.
OM: 2010 Champs said 01/11, 09:00 PM
I agree that Wisconsin faced tougher D's than VT did, but saying the Big 11 is 2nd or 3rd toughest is false, but that's a different discussion.
Tolzien's a good QB. But you cannot expect him to peform as usual going up against by far the best pass rush he will have faced all year.
Additionally, you are severly underrating the Stanford secondary. They got beaten up once, big whoop. And it should be noted, the team still won that game. Anyways, Stanford ranks 19th in the nation with 18 INTs and 15th with 50 pass deflections. A mediocre secondary doesn't do that. In fact, statistically speaking, Stanford's secondary would be the 3rd best that Wisconsin has faced all year.
Stanford's offense is better than Wisconsin's regardless of 3 70 point performances on crap teams.
While I would give the edge in rushing to Wisconsin, Stanford's run game is no slouch. 7 different players scored rushing TDs, and 4 had over 400 rush yards. They ranked 18th in rushing.
Pass offense, big edge Cardinal. Not sure how much I have to explain this, but Cardinal passing numbers dwarf Wisconsin's. Not to mention that the O-line allowed 8 fewer sacks on over 100 more passing attempts.
- Awful Announcing
- Free Darko
- Pro Football Talk
- The Big Lead
- Joe Posnanski
- The Sporting Blog
- Big League Stew
- Bugs and Cranks
- Every day Should Be Saturday
- Mr. Irrelevant
- With Leather
- The Sports Hernia