[Eddy Munny]

Christian McCaffrey must have a lot of pull with oddsmakers because he's the only reason why Stanford would have such a bloated perception as to make them a 9 point favorite in this spot.

I'm not particularly impressed with this year's Cardinal squad and, to me, the line feels like it should be more like -3 or -3.5. Granted, Stanford's only played one game, but they had to replace their quarterback, Hogan, and three starters along the offensive line. McCaffrey didn't have a ton of running room in that first game and was kept in check for the most part.

USC returns nine starters on offense, and, although they too have to replace their quarterback, he's the beneficiary of operating behind an offensive line returning all their starters from last year and a JuJu Smith-Schuster at receiver.

Stanford has had the Trojans' number in recent times, but I think the talent level has evened out a bit between these two teams and I wouldn't be surprised to see USC win this game outright. You can throw out the thrashing by Bama because Bama makes a lot of teams look terrible.

USC +9

[unde0087]

Well considering that last time USC faced a top team they looked like a high school team this doesn't surprise me

[Eddy Munny]

I don't consider Stanford a top team though and I imagine they'd get their hats handed to 'em by Bama as well.

[MoMoneyMoVaughn]

cash crab eddy back with massive play

[jjgold]

It does look very easy taking the Trojans plus the number even in a teaser I'm all over this game

[Electrons]

Christian McCaffrey must have a lot of pull with oddsmakers because he's the only reason why Stanford would have such a bloated perception as to make them a 9 point favorite in this spot.

I'm not particularly impressed with this year's Cardinal squad and, to me, the line feels like it should be more like -3 or -3.5. Granted, Stanford's only played one game, but they had to replace their quarterback, Hogan, and three starters along the offensive line. McCaffrey didn't have a ton of running room in that first game and was kept in check for the most part.

USC returns nine starters on offense, and, although they too have to replace their quarterback, he's the beneficiary of operating behind an offensive line returning all their starters from last year and a JuJu Smith-Schuster at receiver.

Stanford has had the Trojans' number in recent times, but I think the talent level has evened out a bit between these two teams and I wouldn't be surprised to see USC win this game outright. You can throw out the thrashing by Bama because Bama makes a lot of teams look terrible.

USC +9

I am wif ya Munny. I think SC sells out to stop the run, and I'm pretty sure Stanford doesn't have the ability to hurt them like Alabama did. And Stanford offers none of the defensive challenges a team like Alabama does. Stanford may win, but it's going to be close.

I'm waiting on this number 'til tomorrow.

GL.

[pavyracer]

It does look very easy taking the Trojans plus the number even in a teaser I'm all over this game

You went all in on Utah St. You may be broke when this game starts.

[JayDr3am]

when USC play any team of caliber they fold like paper. Stanford ROLLS. +12 win

[RetardStrength]

Rather USC FH...they might hang early and will likely fade late

[SharpAngles]

McCaffery over 700 all purpose yards last 2 games against USC. Against better Trojan defense.

[smitch124]

I don't consider Stanford a top team though and I imagine they'd get their hats handed to 'em by Bama as well.

I agree Stanford is overrated this year, or at the very least, unproven.

[phil_abuster]

Christian McCaffrey must have a lot of pull with oddsmakers because he's the only reason why Stanford would have such a bloated perception as to make them a 9 point favorite in this spot.

I'm not particularly impressed with this year's Cardinal squad and, to me, the line feels like it should be more like -3 or -3.5. Granted, Stanford's only played one game, but they had to replace their quarterback, Hogan, and three starters along the offensive line. McCaffrey didn't have a ton of running room in that first game and was kept in check for the most part.

USC returns nine starters on offense, and, although they too have to replace their quarterback, he's the beneficiary of operating behind an offensive line returning all their starters from last year and a JuJu Smith-Schuster at receiver.

Stanford has had the Trojans' number in recent times, but I think the talent level has evened out a bit between these two teams and I wouldn't be surprised to see USC win this game outright. You can throw out the thrashing by Bama because Bama makes a lot of teams look terrible.

USC +9

hmmm.
very close call imo
some friendly thoughts......
trojans were a mediocre 8-6 last yr
cardinal were 12-2 ,winning the rose bowl very impressively!

usc looked horrible against a high rated team (bama) - getting bitch-slapped by 46 pts - and that was on a neutral field!
cant throw out that embarrassment vs bama. sorry. cuz bama only beat wku by 28 - and that was in bama!
on a neutral field usc should have shown us much better if they r truly a good team.
certainly a better showing than wku did against them!!
now this is a true road game against a very good home opponent who have had 15 days to prepare!
sorry. line looks about right to me.
pass for me, but good luck to u

[smitch124]

hmmm.
very close call imo
some friendly thoughts......
trojans were a mediocre 8-6 last yr
cardinal were 12-2 ,winning the rose bowl very impressively!

usc looked horrible against a high rated team (bama) - getting bitch-slapped by 46 pts - and that was on a neutral field!
cant throw out that embarrassment vs bama. sorry. cuz bama only beat wku by 28 - and that was in bama!
on a neutral field usc should have shown us much better if they r truly a good team.
certainly a better showing than wku did against them!!
now this is a true road game against a very good home opponent who have had 15 days to prepare!
sorry. line looks about right to me.
pass for me, but good luck to u

The one thing you need to know about Stanford, though, is they are truly one of the worst home fields as far as creating an advantage. Sometimes a lot of people show up, but they aren't very passionate.

[jjgold]

8.5 now

[NardVa]

When USC fell behind at Bama it look like they quit. If Stanford gets up by a touchdown or two early, will USC quit?

[Eddy Munny]

Admittedly, USC shouldn't be getting obliterated by Bama if they're a great team... but nobody is proclaiming them to be great. I'm just saying they're on par with, or at least close to, Stanford this year. Hell, Michigan State got trounced by the Tide last year to and I doubt anybody would have given that team 9 points against Stanford.

It's college football. Blowouts happen. Teams ebb and flow. Bama mauls people, that's what they do. But USC is on a level playing field with Stanford, and, having lost to them twice last year, will at least be motivated to play a good game. The home field advantage for the Cardinal is nothing remarkable and the coaching advantage is marginal, if at all. I'm not a big fan of David Shaw.

I'd submit that looking very underwhelming in a home win over Kansas State and getting crushed by Bama on a neutral field really aren't that far apart anyways, if we're doing the eyeball test. This Stanford team would have no chance against the Tide either so it's somewhat irrelevant. USC won't be outclassed this week like they were in the opener.

[phil_abuster]

Admittedly, USC shouldn't be getting obliterated by Bama if they're a great team... but nobody is proclaiming them to be great. I'm just saying they're on par with, or at least close to, Stanford this year. Hell, Michigan State got trounced by the Tide last year to and I doubt anybody would have given that team 9 points against Stanford.

It's college football. Blowouts happen. Teams ebb and flow. Bama mauls people, that's what they do. But USC is on a level playing field with Stanford, and, having lost to them twice last year, will at least be motivated to play a good game. The home field advantage for the Cardinal is nothing remarkable and the coaching advantage is marginal, if at all. I'm not a big fan of David Shaw.

I'd submit that looking very underwhelming in a home win over Kansas State and getting crushed by Bama on a neutral field really aren't that far apart anyways, if we're doing the eyeball test. This Stanford team would have no chance against the Tide either so it's somewhat irrelevant. USC won't be outclassed this week like they were in the opener.

cheers!
more friendly counter-thoughts for consideration by all our readers
(no disrespect intended anyone, and I have no bet on either side)

sorry, cant agree with some of your reasoning here because there is a bit more speculation than hard fact, imo
bama mauls people? ok.
but AT HOME they only "mauled" mediocre wku by 28.
wku not in anybodys top 25 - not even close.
while bama bitch-slapped the trojans by a whopping 46 and that was on a neutral field!
ergo, is mediocre wku comparatively better than usc ??! i think not but clearly wku did play bama tougher and in a much tougher field than did usc.
stanford is not only on everyones top 25, they r in the top 10 on most.

using the eyeball test i figure (and so do ALL the ratings) stanford is significantly better than wku, and (my speculation) cardinal would likely lose to bama but by only 17-21 (not 28 like mediocre wku)

not a great home field advantage for cardinal? perhaps.
maybe not "great" per se. but still a home field advantage better than a neutral field and shouldnt bet be overlooked for the defending Pac 12 and Rose Bowl champs. i learned (the hard way) a long time ago never to brush off any home field advantage

was trojan's embarrassing beatdown a one-off? possibly a really bad day that we shouldn't come to expect of them? ok. possibly.
but that same reasoning could be used to explain stanford's lacklustre win over ksu!!

revenge match for usc? yes, agreed!
but i suggest that stanford may be equally motivated coming off a lacklustre victory.
the stats were against them in that game. they shouldve played much better. 2 turnovers saved their butts. they know it. the coaches have drilled that into them. and this is still fresh in their minds cuz it was their last game.
and they have had a whopping 15 days to prepare for one team: trojans.
please , my gambling comrades out there, dont underestimate the importance of all this extra prep time. huge advantage.

and then there r injury concerns.
stanford is healthy.
but trojans appear to have a banged-up defense. double-check the injury reports

otoh, i figured sundevils would have no trouble covering -19 against weakass utsa.
i was obviously dead wrong. so what do i know

still, stanford appears to be a stronger team than usc, they r playing at home, they r healthy, and they've had 15 days to prepare. line appears to be appropriate.
i am passing on this game but hope im wrong and wish u luck!

[Eddy Munny]

Concerning the Western Kentucky game, Alabama traditionally takes it easy on these smaller conference schools that pose no threat. I'm sure had they wanted to, the game could have had a more lopsided outcome. Plus, WKU was sandwiched right between USC and this week's Ole Miss game, which Bama is surely chomping at the bit for, so it was a natural letdown spot for the Tide.

At any rate, it really makes no difference whether USC got beat by 28 or 68, at some point you simply acknowledge that the wheels came off in that game and move on. I'd be more concerned if they had come out flat the following week against Utah State, but that wasn't the case.

As far as the 15 extra days of preparation for Stanford, I'm not fully convinced that serves as some monumental advantage for Stanford. I think having a bye this early in the year could almost be a detriment to a team with a lot of young players. Unlike the NFL, there is no slate of preseason games to work the kinks out... teams have to figure things out in games that matter. USC, having that additional game under their belt, has more film to see what needs improvement, and more reps for the first year starters.

USC is a decided underdog in this game, and that, along with the losses last year to Stanford, and the blowout on national TV to open the season, serves as incentive for the Trojans to show well against a top 10 and get some of that bad taste out of their mouths... It's also probably a bit of a statement game for Coach Clay, who's job isn't exactly ironclad.

Thanks for the contributions, Phil. You make some very valid points about this game, which are always welcome.

[USCPHILLYGUY]

Concerning the Western Kentucky game, Alabama traditionally takes it easy on these smaller conference schools that pose no threat. I'm sure had they wanted to, the game could have had a more lopsided outcome. Plus, WKU was sandwiched right between USC and this week's Ole Miss game, which Bama is surely chomping at the bit for, so it was a natural letdown spot for the Tide.

At any rate, it really makes no difference whether USC got beat by 28 or 68, at some point you simply acknowledge that the wheels came off in that game and move on. I'd be more concerned if they had come out flat the following week against Utah State, but that wasn't the case.

As far as the 15 extra days of preparation for Stanford, I'm not fully convinced that serves as some monumental advantage for Stanford. I think having a bye this early in the year could almost be a detriment to a team with a lot of young players. Unlike the NFL, there is no slate of preseason games to work the kinks out... teams have to figure things out in games that matter. USC, having that additional game under their belt, has more film to see what needs improvement, and more reps for the first year starters.

USC is a decided underdog in this game, and that, along with the losses last year to Stanford, and the blowout on national TV to open the season, serves as incentive for the Trojans to show well against a top 10 and get some of that bad taste out of their mouths... It's also probably a bit of a statement game for Coach Clay, who's job isn't exactly ironclad.

Thanks for the contributions, Phil. You make some very valid points about this game, which are always welcome.

the only 2 points you need to know

[Gooleez21]

The crazy line of the week is ND getting -7, 7.5 against Michigan State

[Easy-Rider 66]

The crazy line of the week is ND getting -7, 7.5 against Michigan State

Good call On ND line. Looks like Stanford will cover.

[jjgold]

Maybe USC was overrated

[Eddy Munny]

Not a good bet. Stanford won the trench battle when they had the ball and that allowed them to shorten the game. I thought overall USC played good enough for the cover but the little things killed them i.e. penalties, the failed fourth and short conversion, Smith-Schuster's certain touchdown drop etc .

[smitch124]

Not a good bet. Stanford won the trench battle when they had the ball and that allowed them to shorten the game. I thought overall USC played good enough for the cover but the little things killed them i.e. penalties, the failed fourth and short conversion, Smith-Schuster's certain touchdown drop etc .

Was a good bet, good bets don't always pan out.

[JayDr3am]

when USC play any team of caliber they fold like paper. Stanford ROLLS. +12 win

[phil_abuster]

cheers!
more friendly counter-thoughts for consideration by all our readers
(no disrespect intended anyone, and I have no bet on either side)

sorry, cant agree with some of your reasoning here because there is a bit more speculation than hard fact, imo
bama mauls people? ok.
but AT HOME they only "mauled" mediocre wku by 28.
wku not in anybodys top 25 - not even close.
while bama bitch-slapped the trojans by a whopping 46 and that was on a neutral field!
ergo, is mediocre wku comparatively better than usc ??! i think not but clearly wku did play bama tougher and in a much tougher field than did usc.
stanford is not only on everyones top 25, they r in the top 10 on most.

using the eyeball test i figure (and so do ALL the ratings) stanford is significantly better than wku, and (my speculation) cardinal would likely lose to bama but by only 17-21 (not 28 like mediocre wku)

not a great home field advantage for cardinal? perhaps.
maybe not "great" per se. but still a home field advantage better than a neutral field and shouldnt bet be overlooked for the defending Pac 12 and Rose Bowl champs. i learned (the hard way) a long time ago never to brush off any home field advantage

was trojan's embarrassing beatdown a one-off? possibly a really bad day that we shouldn't come to expect of them? ok. possibly.
but that same reasoning could be used to explain stanford's lacklustre win over ksu!!

revenge match for usc? yes, agreed!
but i suggest that stanford may be equally motivated coming off a lacklustre victory.
the stats were against them in that game. they shouldve played much better. 2 turnovers saved their butts. they know it. the coaches have drilled that into them. and this is still fresh in their minds cuz it was their last game.
and they have had a whopping 15 days to prepare for one team: trojans.
please , my gambling comrades out there, dont underestimate the importance of all this extra prep time. huge advantage.

and then there r injury concerns.
stanford is healthy.
but trojans appear to have a banged-up defense. double-check the injury reports

otoh, i figured sundevils would have no trouble covering -19 against weakass utsa.
i was obviously dead wrong. so what do i know

still, stanford appears to be a stronger team than usc, they r playing at home, they r healthy, and they've had 15 days to prepare. line appears to be appropriate.
i am passing on this game but hope im wrong and wish u luck!

wow'
couldnt view the game. only the final score.
it seems the teams i discussed with analysis won today, the others lost

[Ghenghis Kahn]

wow'
couldnt view the game. only the final score.
it seems the teams i discussed with analysis won today, the others lost

[gauchojake]

that is awesome. this should be a :thingy: