I'm becoming rather cautious with the WSU +17 line @ Furd. With the quitting of the Pac12's top referee and the spread not making sense to any of us, I wonder how rigged this Friday game will be? What's even weirder is that the line hasn't really moved from WSU +17, whereas the UW @ Cal game moved from Cal +3.5 to Cal -3.5.

Are all of us who think the line is way off base being played somehow? What is going on?

If I bet, I would bet it. But we also can be incredibly biased.

I don't like the spread either, but given the close loss at Notre Dame, bettors still think Furd is a good team and have little regard for a Washington State squad that scored 59 points but still couldn't close it out against a defense that gave up 49, 56 and 59 in its last 3 games.

i have a hard time believing that stanford will score more than 28 points. that doesnt leave a whole lot of margin for error against the WSU offense against the spread

travelingbears;842378866 said:

---

I'm becoming rather cautious with the WSU +17 line @ Furd. With the quitting of the Pac12's top referee and the spread not making sense to any of us, I wonder how rigged this Friday game will be? What's even weirder is that the line hasn't really moved from WSU +17, whereas the UW @ Cal game moved from Cal +3.5 to Cal -3.5.

Are all of us who think the line is way off base being played somehow? What is going on?

---

What information do we have to go on to say whether the line is way off base one way or another? Just because WSU picked apart our defense doesn't mean they will match up well against the Furd. Hell, Nevada shut them down on the road so why can't the statistically #1 ranked defense in the nation? I tend to think that WSU will cover but I certainly wouldn't bet on it. And no, the games are not rigged.

travelingbears;842378866 said:

---

I'm becoming rather cautious with the WSU +17 line @ Furd. With the quitting of the Pac12's top referee and the spread not making sense to any of us, I wonder how rigged this Friday game will be? What's even weirder is that the line hasn't really moved from WSU +17, whereas the UW @ Cal game moved from Cal +3.5 to Cal -3.5.

Are all of us who think the line is way off base being played somehow? What is going on?

---

What information do we have to go on to say whether the line is way off base one way or another? Just because WSU picked apart our defense doesn't mean they will match up well against the Furd. Oregon has run the most successful variation of the spread offense for the last few years and Stanford has almost completely shut them down the past two years. Their personnel is designed against being spread out. Hell, Nevada shutWSU down on the road so why can't the statistically #1 ranked defense in the nation? I tend to think that WSU will cover but I certainly wouldn't bet on it. And no, the games are not rigged.

Holmoephobic;842378881 said:

---

What information do we have to go on to say whether the line is way off base one way or another? Just because WSU picked apart our defense doesn't mean they will match up well against the Furd. Hell, Nevada shut them down on the road so why can't the statistically #1 ranked defense in the nation? I tend to think that WSU will cover but I certainly wouldn't bet on it. And no, the games are not rigged.

---

Have you seen furd's offense? Lets say furd plays a really good defense game and hold them to 10 pts. You're asking them to score 27 pts. Really?

Holmoephobic;842378883 said:

---

What information do we have to go on to say whether the line is way off base one way or another? Just because WSU picked apart our defense doesn't mean they will match up well against the Furd. Oregon has run the most successful variation of the spread offense for the last few years and Stanford has almost completely shut them down the past two years. Their personnel is designed against being spread out. Hell, Nevada shutWSU down on the road so why can't the statistically #1 ranked defense in the nation? I tend to think that WSU will cover but I certainly wouldn't bet on it. And no, the games are not rigged.

---

My thing on this is I can't imagine Stanford scoring more than 17 points right now against any Pac-12 defense, and I can't picture WSU being held scoreless. I figure WSU with their experienced O-line and very good offense should score at least 24-28 points against Stanford. For Stanford to beat the spread they'd need to score 41 or more.

Now I'm sure part of this is that anyone not paying close attention to Cal doesn't realize that the team is beating the average points allowed by most teams by 20 or more and thinks that WSU's defense is really that bad after allowing Cal to score 60 points. Eventually people will figure out that the Cal offense really is that good.

Davidson;842378886 said:

---

Have you seen furd's offense? Lets say furd plays a really good defense game and hold them to 10 pts. You're asking them to score 27 pts. Really?

---

POINTS FOR
24.8
91st
Overall

POINTS AGAINST
8.6
1st
Overall

It's not out of the question, although if you take out the UC Davis and Army games, these averages change to 14.7 and 14.3, respectively.

I agree the spread seems strange. I think the Stanfurd coach would also agree. My impression of Stanfurd is that if they are up 14, they will try to slow the game way, way down counting on their defense and a conservative offense to preserve the game.

If I was still a betting man I would take WSU plus 17. If you are almost certain that Stanford can't cover then go make some money.

Perhaps WSU's defense is just what the doctor ordered to bring Stanford's offense back to health...and, the Stanford defense is the kind that has plagued Halliday over his career: Heavy rush plus quality secondary.

mvargus;842378890 said:

---

My thing on this is I can't imagine Stanford scoring more than 17 points right now against any Pac-12 defense, and I can't picture WSU being held scoreless. I figure WSU with their experienced O-line and very good offense should score at least 24-28 points against Stanford. For Stanford to beat the spread they'd need to score 41 or more.

Now I'm sure part of this is that anyone not paying close attention to Cal doesn't realize that the team is beating the average points allowed by most teams by 20 or more and thinks that WSU's defense is really that bad after allowing Cal to score 60 points. Eventually people will figure out that the Cal offense really is that good.

---

Exactly. It's all about Furd's offense sucking ass. That defense is good but it couldn't even hold Washington's ****-poor offense to under 13 points. I just don't see how Furd beats a 17 point spread.

Calcoholic;842378939 said:

---

Exactly. It's all about Furd's offense sucking ass. That defense is good but it couldn't even hold Washington's ****-poor offense to under 13 points. I just don't see how Furd beats a 17 point spread.

---

Actually, Stanfurd's defense held the Husky offense to 6 points (UW got 7 points off of a Shaq Thompson fumble recovery). And Stanfurd did hold Washington to 179 yards of total offense.

FWIW, Sagarin Predictor has Stanfurd as an 18 point favorite over WSU at home, so that would help explain why the line opened at 17. The fact that it hasn't changed means there has not been enough action on the game to warrant moving the line.

I bet WSU.

The only thing I'm fearful is Montgomery on punts and kickoffs. Stanford's secondary is weak and this is the first passing team they have faced this year where the weather will be optimal. I like wsu to cover and possibly win.

Those they took WSU either pushed (if they made the bet before Wednesday) or lost.

Even though the game was fairly one-sided, Stanford ended up covering only because the Cougs just gave up at the end instead of trying to narrow the score with their TOs and some time left, it was a bit perplexing.

Cal88;842380181 said:

---

Even though the game was fairly one-sided, Stanford ended up covering only because the Cougs just gave up at the end instead of trying to narrow the score with their TOs and some time left, it was a bit perplexing.

---

Really? I don't think the game was as close as the final score indicated. -26 yards rushing and 4.2 yards/attempt on 69 passing attempts. Ouch.

Furd missed out on 17 points. Wash St missed on none. The score speaks for itself, but Furd kicked the Cougs all over the field. I wish we had some of their defense.

Cal88;842380181 said:

---

Even though the game was fairly one-sided, Stanford ended up covering only because the Cougs just gave up at the end instead of trying to narrow the score with their TOs and some time left, it was a bit perplexing.

---

They gave up because they didn't want to fit their qb for a full body cast.

Cal wore 'em out.

dimitrig;842380264 said:

---

Really? I don't think the game was as close as the final score indicated. -26 yards rushing and 4.2 yards/attempt on 69 passing attempts. Ouch.

---

NCAA stats should really subtract sack yards from passing yards (like the NFL), not rushing. That said, 30 yards on 7 attempts isn't great.

Bobodeluxe;842380291 said:

---

Cal wore 'em out.

---

that is my thought and on a short week ..

In the end Vegas was right on with this one. I hope they're right on with our game today as well.