<p>Oregon State 48, Stanford 10.</p>
<p>Maybe the nation's biggest athletic budget should drop a few volleyball or water polo scholarships and invest another $ million or so in the football program. </p>
<p>Coach Harris not off to an auspicious start in season #2..</p>
<p>University of Oregon. Not Oregon State.</p>
<p>i doubt cutting money for water polo and volleyball players would do us any good. we'd still suck at football. and doing that would just make us suck at volleyball and waterpolo as well. </p>
<p>the football team has EIGHTY FIVE, yes, EIGHT FRIGGIN FIVE players on scholarship. 85!? yeah, and we need more scholarship money for football players. i don't think so. </p>
<p>what we need are coaches who don't suck a.ss.</p>
<p>Bring back Buddy Teevens!</p>
<p>Could be worse. Look at the Cal vs UT game. Very ugly.</p>
<p>They violated the cardinal rule of football factory schools: never open the season on the road against a team you can't manhandle.</p>
<p>snuggle,</p>
<p>Tennesee 35 -- Cal 11 vs Oregon 48 -- Stanford 10</p>
<p>how the hell is the Cal vs UT game worse than ours?</p>
<p>It's the ranking.</p>
<p>It's a mild "upset."</p>
<p>Because Cal is ranked #9 in the country and we're barely #9 on the peninsula.</p>
<p>i don't care if Cal is #1 in the universe. it's still a lot worse when we get beat... esp if it's by 38 and they were "only" beat by 24.</p>
<p>We just have standards. We won't take someone who doesn't deserve to be their based on their athletic ability AND academic merit. So now we get to pay for our standards.</p>
<p>"We just have standards. We won't take someone who doesn't deserve to be their[sic]"</p>
<p>Legacy? Big donation? John Elway?</p>
<p>And how is Cal a "football factory school?" Until a couple of years ago we were the laughing stock of the pack ten. Don't get mad just because harvard can't field a team.</p>
<p>Lol that is a pretty bad game, but I'm applying to Stanford for the academics, not the football team. </p>
<p>(What a sore loserish thing to say!)</p>
<p>Frankly, I don't think we should have a good football team. That would involve sacrificing academic standards. All good academic schools that offer football scholarships have terrible teams--Northwestern, Duke, Rice, etc., and I don't think we should be any different. </p>
<p>And we can win the Director's Cup by a wide margin and have terrible football. </p>
<p>Oregon looked like it will be able to challenge USC this year, although I doubt they will pull it out.</p>
<p>A very realistic outlook, zepher.</p>
<p>If you are interested in an exciting spectator experience, you might check out the women's volleyball team.</p>
<p>So I was just curious...the first Stanford home game is Sep. 16th (I think), more than a week before the first day of school...who will be there to attend this game?</p>
<p>A lot of people curious to see the new stadium, which holds only 50,000 rather that the 85,000 capacity of the old stadium. </p>
<p>The hope is that a smaller stadium will look fuller with a smaller crowd, and the players won't have to look up at so many empty seats.</p>
<p>Stanford hadn't had a full house in years - even for the "Big Game" against Cal.</p>
<p>i don't think we'll ever have a full stadium. maybe for a future big game, but not any other. seriously, there's only like 15,000 of us, and that's counting all the undergrad and grad student. and we all know that only like 10% go to football games...if that. my estimate could be off, but there's absolutely no way it's gonna look that much more packed. although i guess alumni come to games sometimes. and 30,000 less seats IS a lot.</p>
<p>Actually Northwestern has a pretty decent football team. They did make it to a bowl last year. Somehow they manage to put a winning season together.</p>
<p>yay! for Bylerly.</p>