will have faced.  It's not like they are in the Big 12 either.  The Pac-12 has better passing offenses than the Big 10, no doubt, but they aren't amazing either. What I'm trying to say is, all this worried about how Phillips/Stave will be able to pass against them is very overblown.

Huh? Stanford has the 24th lowest (we're 21st) passer rating against and leads the nation in sacks by a solid margin. Are you looking at yards per game or what?

panama74 wrote: Huh? Stanford has the 24th lowest (we're 21st) passer rating against and leads the nation in sacks by a solid margin. Are you looking at yards per game or what?

Not sure what you are looking at Panama.  According to the NCAA database, we are 24th in passing defense while Stanford is 83rd

So yeah, you're looking at yards per game. Stanford has the second most passing attempts against in the country. Stanford's opponent's passed almost 100 more times against them than ours did against us. Of course they're going to give up more yards.

Stanford's D gave up 12 passing touchdowns while intercepting 14 passes. Our defense had 18 and 8, respectively. Their passing defense isn't bad, any (logical) way you slice it.

Don't forget the fact their run D is one of the best in the nation. So, many teams abandoned the run bc it wasn't working... Plus the fact they were ahead in the 4th quarter of most of their games... Of corse they are going to give up a lot of passing yards.

Stanford is 78th in completion % at 61.2% and 84th in yards per game.  Regardless of how many times they were passed against those are not awesome numbers.  That argument goes both ways.  Their run defense is so good they turn teams one dimensional and still give up a completion % over 61 which is not good by any stretch.

Idk what to tell you if you think yards per game is a better way to evaluate passing defense than passer rating. It just isn't. After accounting for sacks, Stanford's pass defense is actually better than ours (I'd have to run the numbers, but I'm pretty confident it would be).

panama74 wrote: Idk what to tell you if you think yards per game is a better way to evaluate passing defense than passer rating. It just isn't. After accounting for sacks, Stanford's pass defense is actually better than ours (I'd have to run the numbers, but I'm pretty confident it would be).

No passing yards isn't better than Passer rating, but completion % mixed with yards should give pause.  Clearly I'm being a homer stirring the pot, but Stanfords passing defense leaves a lot to be desired IMO.  With the number of sacks they have and a top ranked rushing defense it's amazing to me their passing defense numbers are not better. The TD/Int ratio is good, but how in the hell with that much pressure on opposing QB's and knowing nobody can run the ball do they only have 14 pics?

I see where you're coming from. Their run defense isn't as amazing as the YPC would make you believe, though, because that includes the negative yardage from all of their sacks. It's good, but not great. It's not as good as MSU's and it's in the same ballpark as PSU's and OSU's.

the608 wrote: Don't forget the fact their run D is one of the best in the nation. So, many teams abandoned the run bc it wasn't working... Plus the fact they were ahead in the 4th quarter of most of their games... Of corse they are going to give up a lot of passing yards.

I call that the 2011 Green Bay Packers Effect.

Yes maybe their pass defense is down, but our pass offense isn't much better.
If they stop our run then what?   Azzanni and Faulkner developed zero threats other than the established Abby and Peterson.

combatsports4life wrote:

panama74 wrote: Idk what to tell you if you think yards per game is a better way to evaluate passing defense than passer rating. It just isn't. After accounting for sacks, Stanford's pass defense is actually better than ours (I'd have to run the numbers, but I'm pretty confident it would be).

No passing yards isn't better than Passer rating, but completion % mixed with yards should give pause.  Clearly I'm being a homer stirring the pot, but Stanfords passing defense leaves a lot to be desired IMO.  With the number of sacks they have and a top ranked rushing defense it's amazing to me their passing defense numbers are not better. The TD/Int ratio is good, but how in the hell with that much pressure on opposing QB's and knowing nobody can run the ball do they only have 14 pics?

Stanford has played 8 games against teams ranked in the top 36 nationally in passing yards per game.  That might explain why they gave up a few passing yards.  Wisconsin played 4.  Conversely, Wisconsin also played a bunch of terrible passing offenses.

Stanford's pass D is pretty darn good this season as evidenced by their #24 rank in pass efficiency D despite playing very good passing offenses.

blockm2 wrote:

combatsports4life wrote:

panama74 wrote: Idk what to tell you if you think yards per game is a better way to evaluate passing defense than passer rating. It just isn't. After accounting for sacks, Stanford's pass defense is actually better than ours (I'd have to run the numbers, but I'm pretty confident it would be).

No passing yards isn't better than Passer rating, but completion % mixed with yards should give pause.  Clearly I'm being a homer stirring the pot, but Stanfords passing defense leaves a lot to be desired IMO.  With the number of sacks they have and a top ranked rushing defense it's amazing to me their passing defense numbers are not better. The TD/Int ratio is good, but how in the hell with that much pressure on opposing QB's and knowing nobody can run the ball do they only have 14 pics?

Stanford has played 8 games against teams ranked in the top 36 nationally in passing yards per game.  That might explain why they gave up a few passing yards.  Wisconsin played 4.  Conversely, Wisconsin also played a bunch of terrible passing offenses.

Stanford's pass D is pretty darn good this season as evidenced by their #24 rank in pass efficiency D despite playing very good passing offenses.

Stop with the logic, I'm trolling for Stanford folks.

redline59 wrote: Yes maybe their pass defense is down, but our pass offense isn't much better.
If they stop our run then what?   Azzanni and Faulkner developed zero threats other than the established Abby and Peterson.

You know our Pass offense gets ripped on quite a bit, but in reality it's not that bad.  I'm mean everyone want's to use passer rating and our passing rating is over 20 spots better than Stanfords.  Before I hear the, Nunes was their QB rant, O'Brien was ours.  The two worst games we had in terms of passer rating BY FAR all season long were our 2nd and 3rd games of the season.  So if there passing defense isn't that bad then neither is our passing offense.  Do we use it a lot, no, but it's not nearly as horrible as people make it out to be.

combatsports4life wrote:

panama74 wrote: Idk what to tell you if you think yards per game is a better way to evaluate passing defense than passer rating. It just isn't. After accounting for sacks, Stanford's pass defense is actually better than ours (I'd have to run the numbers, but I'm pretty confident it would be).

No passing yards isn't better than Passer rating, but completion % mixed with yards should give pause.  Clearly I'm being a homer stirring the pot, but Stanfords passing defense leaves a lot to be desired IMO.  With the number of sacks they have and a top ranked rushing defense it's amazing to me their passing defense numbers are not better. The TD/Int ratio is good, but how in the hell with that much pressure on opposing QB's and knowing nobody can run the ball do they only have 14 pics?

This board is such a hoot.  So many people grasping at any straw they can to try to convince themselves that their BCS unranked team has been just as good this season as has their #6 ranked opponent. Wisconsin may very well win the game, as that is the nature of the sport.  Footballs are oblong, not round.  Wisconsin players are on scholarship, just like their bowl opponents. But until then, this site is so very entertaining.

fellowship wrote:

combatsports4life wrote:

panama74 wrote: Idk what to tell you if you think yards per game is a better way to evaluate passing defense than passer rating. It just isn't. After accounting for sacks, Stanford's pass defense is actually better than ours (I'd have to run the numbers, but I'm pretty confident it would be).

No passing yards isn't better than Passer rating, but completion % mixed with yards should give pause.  Clearly I'm being a homer stirring the pot, but Stanfords passing defense leaves a lot to be desired IMO.  With the number of sacks they have and a top ranked rushing defense it's amazing to me their passing defense numbers are not better. The TD/Int ratio is good, but how in the hell with that much pressure on opposing QB's and knowing nobody can run the ball do they only have 14 pics?

This board is such a hoot.  So many people grasping at any straw they can to try to convince themselves that their BCS unranked team has been just as good this season as has their #6 ranked opponent. Wisconsin may very well win the game, as that is the nature of the sport.  Footballs are oblong, not round.  Wisconsin players are on scholarship, just like their bowl opponents. But until then, this site is so very entertaining.

I'll take that as a compliment.

combatsports4life wrote:

redline59 wrote: Yes maybe their pass defense is down, but our pass offense isn't much better.
If they stop our run then what?   Azzanni and Faulkner developed zero threats other than the established Abby and Peterson.

You know our Pass offense gets ripped on quite a bit, but in reality it's not that bad.  I'm mean everyone want's to use passer rating and our passing rating is over 20 spots better than Stanfords.  Before I hear the, Nunes was their QB rant, O'Brien was ours.  The two worst games we had in terms of passer rating BY FAR all season long were our 2nd and 3rd games of the season.  So if there passing defense isn't that bad then neither is our passing offense.  Do we use it a lot, no, but it's not nearly as horrible as people make it out to be.

Geezus I guess I never thought of it that way?!

RacineRed wrote:

panama74 wrote: Huh? Stanford has the 24th lowest (we're 21st) passer rating against and leads the nation in sacks by a solid margin. Are you looking at yards per game or what?

Not sure what you are looking at Panama.  According to the NCAA database, we are 24th in passing defense while Stanford is 83rd

Correct:
http://www.ncaa.com/stats/foot...rrent/team/1030

blockm2 wrote:

combatsports4life wrote:

panama74 wrote: Idk what to tell you if you think yards per game is a better way to evaluate passing defense than passer rating. It just isn't. After accounting for sacks, Stanford's pass defense is actually better than ours (I'd have to run the numbers, but I'm pretty confident it would be).

No passing yards isn't better than Passer rating, but completion % mixed with yards should give pause.  Clearly I'm being a homer stirring the pot, but Stanfords passing defense leaves a lot to be desired IMO.  With the number of sacks they have and a top ranked rushing defense it's amazing to me their passing defense numbers are not better. The TD/Int ratio is good, but how in the hell with that much pressure on opposing QB's and knowing nobody can run the ball do they only have 14 pics?

Stanford has played 8 games against teams ranked in the top 36 nationally in passing yards per game.  That might explain why they gave up a few passing yards.  Wisconsin played 4.  Conversely, Wisconsin also played a bunch of terrible passing offenses.

Stanford's pass D is pretty darn good this season as evidenced by their #24 rank in pass efficiency D despite playing very good passing offenses.

Miss - 72nd in pass efficiency:

http://www.ncaa.com/stats/foot...rrent/team/1030

combatsports4life wrote:

panama74 wrote: Idk what to tell you if you think yards per game is a better way to evaluate passing defense than passer rating. It just isn't. After accounting for sacks, Stanford's pass defense is actually better than ours (I'd have to run the numbers, but I'm pretty confident it would be).

No passing yards isn't better than Passer rating, but completion % mixed with yards should give pause.  Clearly I'm being a homer stirring the pot, but Stanfords passing defense leaves a lot to be desired IMO.  With the number of sacks they have and a top ranked rushing defense it's amazing to me their passing defense numbers are not better. The TD/Int ratio is good, but how in the hell with that much pressure on opposing QB's and knowing nobody can run the ball do they only have 14 pics?

----
A big part of why their rush defense looks so good is because of all the sacks. Dave Heller from JS stated without the sacks Stanford run defense gave up 4.2 yards per carry. If that's the case I think bucky may be able to run for 300 yards in this game.

Everybody gushes about how good Stanford's run defense is, but do you know that they've given up 14 TDs on the ground?  In comparison, ND has given up 2 and MSU has given up 5 TDs all year.  Playing in the pass-heavy Pac12, that's not a good sign.  They don't give up much yardage but they can be scored on.

What planet did you just arrive from?  It was also a hoot when Wisconsin fans thought they could beat Nebraska in the BTCC and why shouldn't fans feel confident about a team that took what was essentially the #1 or #2 team in the country into overtime.  Fans are fans. That's what they do. 

fellowship wrote:
This board is such a hoot.  So many people grasping at any straw they can to try to convince themselves that their BCS unranked team has been just as good this season as has their #6 ranked opponent. Wisconsin may very well win the game, as that is the nature of the sport.  Footballs are oblong, not round.  Wisconsin players are on scholarship, just like their bowl opponents. But until then, this site is so very entertaining.

UWRX95 wrote: Everybody gushes about how good Stanford's run defense is, but do you know that they've given up 14 TDs on the ground?  In comparison, ND has given up 2 and MSU has given up 5 TDs all year.  Playing in the pass-heavy Pac12, that's not a good sign.  They don't give up much yardage but they can be scored on.

Actually their rush D is #3 in the country, giving up only 2.84 ypc. Now have they faced an OL and RB's like UW? Me thinks not.

Watt is a little used but very effective threat in the passing game. Secret weapon.

---------------------------------------------
--- redline59 wrote:

Yes maybe their pass defense is down, but our pass offense isn't much better.
If they stop our run then what?   Azzanni and Faulkner developed zero threats other than the established Abby and Peterson.

---------------------------------------------

I like Arneson. Injury delayed his development early in the year but I think he's going to be a complete player.

Surprised another WR didn't step forward.

---------------------------------------------
--- columbusbadger wrote:

Watt is a little used but very effective threat in the passing game. Secret weapon.

---------------------------------------------
--- redline59 wrote:

Yes maybe their pass defense is down, but our pass offense isn't much better.
If they stop our run then what?   Azzanni and Faulkner developed zero threats other than the established Abby and Peterson.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

orangejumpsuit wrote: What planet did you just arrive from?  It was also a hoot when Wisconsin fans thought they could beat Nebraska in the BTCC and why shouldn't fans feel confident about a team that took what was essentially the #1 or #2 team in the country into overtime.  Fans are fans. That's what they do. 

fellowship wrote:
This board is such a hoot.  So many people grasping at any straw they can to try to convince themselves that their BCS unranked team has been just as good this season as has their #6 ranked opponent. Wisconsin may very well win the game, as that is the nature of the sport.  Footballs are oblong, not round.  Wisconsin players are on scholarship, just like their bowl opponents. But until then, this site is so very entertaining.

Did you just come from the O$U board or something? That is the only place that could seriously discuss the suckeyes being the #1 or 2 team. They didn't even play, let alone beat a Top-15 team this season.

stlbadger wrote:

RacineRed wrote:

panama74 wrote: Huh? Stanford has the 24th lowest (we're 21st) passer rating against and leads the nation in sacks by a solid margin. Are you looking at yards per game or what?

Not sure what you are looking at Panama.  According to the NCAA database, we are 24th in passing defense while Stanford is 83rd

Correct:
http://www.ncaa.com/stats/foot...rrent/team/1030

How can you possibly be so dense?   Raw passing yardage given up is pretty meaningless

stlbadger wrote:

UWRX95 wrote: Everybody gushes about how good Stanford's run defense is, but do you know that they've given up 14 TDs on the ground?  In comparison, ND has given up 2 and MSU has given up 5 TDs all year.  Playing in the pass-heavy Pac12, that's not a good sign.  They don't give up much yardage but they can be scored on.

Actually their rush D is #3 in the country, giving up only 2.84 ypc. Now have they faced an OL and RB's like UW? Me thinks not.

We've covered this.  That ypc includes sack yardage.  Stanford is no where near #3 in the country when it comes to preventing yardage on running plays, which is what "rushing defense" is.

stlbadger wrote:

UWRX95 wrote: Everybody gushes about how good Stanford's run defense is, but do you know that they've given up 14 TDs on the ground?  In comparison, ND has given up 2 and MSU has given up 5 TDs all year.  Playing in the pass-heavy Pac12, that's not a good sign.  They don't give up much yardage but they can be scored on.

Actually their rush D is #3 in the country, giving up only 2.84 ypc. Now have they faced an OL and RB's like UW? Me thinks not.

That 2.84 number is inflated by playing WSU, who averaged 1.4 ypc as a team, and a 1-11 Colorado team that is also bottom of the heap in rushing offense.  Colorado rushed 21 times for -21 yards (gave up 7 sacks) and WSU rushed 23 times for -16 yards (10 sacks).  You can get to #3 in the country when you play offensively inept teams.

In their CCG game, UCLA rushed for 284 yards against them and scored 3 TDs on the ground.  The Badgers are significantly better than UCLA at running the ball. 

I think this is a 50-50 game.  We beat them by 8 points the last time we played them.  I expect to see a one score game again, maybe in the teens.

Your assessment of our pass defense is extremely inaccurate.  When analyzing stats you must look at ALL of the statistics in order to paint a realistic picture of what your team will face.  Our pass defense is solid and the fact that your passing offense is not all that great makes me like that matchup even better.  If your team is forced to win the game passing the ball, the Cardinal defense has done their job well!

combatsports4life wrote: Stanford is 78th in completion % at 61.2% and 84th in yards per game.  Regardless of how many times they were passed against those are not awesome numbers.  That argument goes both ways.  Their run defense is so good they turn teams one dimensional and still give up a completion % over 61 which is not good by any stretch.