Washington / Stanford

[blgstocks]

Stanford is soooo bad, what the hell is wash doing with a 3-0 lead on these guys

They should be blowing them out - its not because of penalties/to either, we all knew stanford Offense was terrible, but how bad is wash right now?

Might be a good 2nd half under play

 

[pt1gard]

blg,

cold but not rainy here ... the UW peter principled imho ... paper thin and played unreal for much of year, they will limp in

 

[blgstocks]

u think under is a solid play gregg?

 

[gjn23]

problem with making a bet in this game is that you have to follow these two losers for an entire half

 

[blgstocks]

problem with making a bet in this game is that you have to follow these two losers for an entire half

:mj07: well said gjn, not worth my time or money, i will just hope wash comes alive 2nd half and start watching sc/fla

 

[ldabdou]

Stanford wins

 

[pt1gard]

have to laff if trees win SU .. 17-3 now

 

[pt1gard]

sorry blg i never saw your under question ...


trees 113th ranked D holds the pathetic UW team to a single FG ... amazing ... sorry u lost tho, my freind


kinda funny a few people who used to jump in udring the early part of year and tell me how the UW isnt bad arent talking much these days after 6 straight Ls and this embarrassment

gl, gregg

 

[gman2]

sorry blg i never saw your under question ...


trees 113th ranked D holds the pathetic UW team to a single FG ... amazing ... sorry u lost tho, my freind


kinda funny a few people who used to jump in udring the early part of year and tell me how the UW isnt bad arent talking much these days after 6 straight Ls and this embarrassment

gl, gregg

did stanback play that i wasnt aware of?

 

[pt1gard]

you really love stanbeck, but truth is hes a scatter arm, 53% ... he did play vs beavs at home and basically lost the game with horrible throwing all game in key spots, even tho beavs tried to hand game to UW ... we've gone back and forth on this and youve always come in 20-20, which is your right ...., well, i guess UW was a one man team in your eyes, but bonnell in his first game nearly led them to win at Cal, so I dont see their qb being their strength or weakness ... Im curious, do you really think stanbeckwill play in nfl? how good you think he is?

 

[gman2]

you really love stanbeck, but truth is hes a scatter arm, 53% ... he did play vs beavs at home and basically lost the game with horrible throwing all game in key spots, even tho beavs tried to hand game to UW ... we've gone back and forth on this and youve always come in 20-20, which is your right ...., well, i guess UW was a one man team in your eyes, but bonnell in his first game nearly led them to win at Cal, so I dont see their qb being their strength or weakness ... Im curious, do you really think stanbeckwill play in nfl? how good you think he is?

reminds me a lot of josh cribbs for the browns. almost the exact same player when he was at kent state. he's obviousy not playing qb in the nfl. but that kind of athlete will always get an nfl camp invite. if stanback is willing to make the transition to receiver or kick return specialist, he absolutely could play in the nfl. he's not a good qb but thats not the point, he made a bad washington team at least competitive because hes such a dynamic player. washington was headed to a minor bowl with him. theyre sitting home w/o him.

 

[pt1gard]

uw rushes 49 times for 52 yds in last couple games ... i just was never enamoured with a qb with such bad mechanics and no real feel ...

i dont think he woulda made a diff, so we'll agree to disagree ... what we differ in perspective wise i guess is that the UW has no depth and didnt surpise me one bit when they faded in stretch ... ok they beat sj st and fresno at home, whoppeee ... then exploded for 21 in short span to win at zona early in year ... other than that, playiig some teams decently who didnt respect them, they were pretty much a joke when it came down to it ...

just seemed you liked them a lot more than I since you enjoyed saying it a couple times after the fact--but i mean losing to tress on sr day, cmon, thats unreal, how can that happen to even a bad team; trees might be worst team in a major conf. in USA ... anyhow, talked to some people who coach here and you are right, they say no chance of him playing in nfl as qb... nice kid and prob should never been a qb ...

 

[gman2]

interestingly enough, i only played on/against washington 1 time the entire year, and that was when oregon state taking the points against them a month ago. never once did i try to make them out to be good. i was probably a little surprised that you were so dismissive of stanback's ability to make plays out of nothing. dont get me wrong, nothing is more frustrating than a bad football team beats you when the qb is running around making playground-type plays against you. but he did bring that element to the field. probably one of the best pure athletes in the pac10. like you said, a good fundamental qb? no way. but somebody who makes a mediocre team worth noticing? i think so. i think he'll find his way onto an nfl roster if he is willing to swallow his pride and make a position switch.

 

[pt1gard]

ok my man gl with your picks, im in a dave kingman slump :scared

 

[blgstocks]

wish i would have jumped on that 2nd half under, but if you would have told me stanford scores 17 in the 2nd half i would have bet my life that the over wouldve hit

what a screwy game