OT: Stanford Rampaging Again

Submitted by SFBlue on September 19th, 2010 at 12:44 AM

Beat UCLA 35-0 (which looks more impressive with UCLA beating up Houston), killing Wake Forest 34-7 with time left in the half.  With Notre Dame coming up next weekend...

Stanford looks scary good. 



September 19th, 2010 at 12:46 AM ^

Their QB Luck is extremely underrated. Everyone seemed to want to chalk that teams success up to Roby Gerhart last year, but they were solid on both sides of the ball and Luck might be the best QB in the Pac-10.


September 19th, 2010 at 3:30 PM ^

I get that Washington isn't very talented, and maybe I'm just catching Locker on bad days, but I swear, everytime I see him play he puts on a 2008 Threetidan performance.  His measurables may be solid, but no aspect of his game impresses me.


September 19th, 2010 at 12:49 AM ^

I feel a little guilty about it. But I have to admit: every time I see Harbaugh's team play well, I think it bodes well for us in the near future. He's the man.


September 19th, 2010 at 12:59 AM ^

Their Defense is dominant, and their offense is pretty good too. They don't have a great passing game, but they don't really need one so who cares. They could win it all this year.

And now they are coming to the Big Ten....shit


September 19th, 2010 at 1:06 AM ^

I was at the Neb-UW game today and they did look pretty damn good.  They gave up a few big plays to Locker but their offensive line was dominant and they eventually settled in on defense.  However, Nebraska's passing offense did not look all that impressive.  I think Washington could have given them a better game had they been able to force Nebraska to make some throws, but the Huskers pretty much just ran it down Washington's throat and UW couldn't stop them, so it got ugly.   


September 19th, 2010 at 9:47 AM ^

So many programs have been built (or re-built) with a modern spread offense, it is nice to see Harbaugh (and Pelini) getting things done with a stout defense and a power running game. I am hoping for our sake we did not witness a symbolic changing of the Tide in the BCS championship last year when Bama beat UF's spread option.


September 19th, 2010 at 11:09 PM ^

and how can you say "Other teams success does not = success for Michigan" when we just abandoned a 40-year regime in favor for a modern approach to football that had proven to be successful against us so many times? How else are you supposed to measure the evolution of schematics in football, besides referencing other teams?


September 20th, 2010 at 2:48 AM ^

If you are suggesting that we used the same system for 40 years, you couldn't be more wrong.  RR's offense is closer in philosophy to what Bo ran than Carr's pro-style.  Bo used to grumble that Carr was sacrificing a lot in the ground game by recruiting QBs with no mobility.


September 20th, 2010 at 3:53 AM ^

Tate Forcier had 281 passing attempts last year.

Rick Leach had 154 as a senior. In his first two seasons, he had more rushing attempts than passes thrown.


Carr's pro style offense was the design of Cam Cameron and the result of Jim Harbaugh being the starting quarterback. When Moeller became offensive coordinator in 1987, we began exclusively recruiting statue QBs.


September 20th, 2010 at 4:32 PM ^

I said "regime" not system, and I was talking more about the fact that Moeller and Carr were members of Bo's staff and had good defenses when they were associated with the program. I am not comparing RR's offensive philosophy with any other Michigan coach, I am comparing his attention to the defense vs. other coaches we have had.

The spread option is a new system at Michigan installed by Rich Rodriguez who has been focused on developing his offensive philosophy as a coach for most of his career (and you can only focus on so much). I have no idea whether it was a conscious decision to go with that system, but the choice did happen to come after the same season we opened with two big losses to spread option teams. 


September 20th, 2010 at 5:23 PM ^

Referring to posters you disagree with as "fanboys" is not going to win you a lot of respect around here.  Your signature suggests that you're pretty young.  Maybe it doesn't make sense for you to talk down to us.


September 20th, 2010 at 5:54 PM ^

sorry. Seems a lot of people are quick to neg-bang based on an opinion that might even have a slight undertone of something that is not 100% support. Make no mistake, I want this program to win, but I was also a sucker for the whole mystique of "3-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust" thing. I am getting used to the new system, though, and it is a lot of fun to watch. The OP I made was based on looking at the interplay of this new offensive evolution with defensive responses to it, which I thought was kind of happening writ-small in last year's SEC championship. Michigan made a big step by choosing to join the party and not be a dinosaur and I hope that we bet on the right horse is all. There are no disagreements going on here, just lots of reading comprehension fails.

Mitch Cumstein

September 19th, 2010 at 10:58 AM ^

Especially with the USC penalties and UCLA and Washington not really moving in the positive direction.  I look at Stanford as the next West-Coast powerhouse.  They will win the Pac10 this year and be NC contenders in the near future.


September 19th, 2010 at 12:43 PM ^

Stanford just seems to be steaming in the right direction, after having been dreadful, pre-JH. And it really does matter than Stanford has by far the most restrictive academic standards on the P10/12/45. It is not a conference known for its high student standards. But Stanford is. Recruiting, at M, would be a piece of cake for him.

Theoretically, I'm mean. Hypothetically.

Sextus Empiricus

September 20th, 2010 at 12:40 AM ^

this will put Michigan, MSU and Purdue into perspective .  I'm thinking Luck is going to have a good day against the ND secondary, but they aren't going to blow out the Irish.  Sacramento State and Portland State are great early games - but these games don't mean much.

I like Stanford against Oregon as well, not because of UCLA (who laid an egg vs. the Trees - and proved they can best Houston's 3rd string QB) but rather what Tennesee did in the first half.  Tenn let that game get out of control.