A student helms the Birdcage booth

Banners hang from Green library

Big Game week at Stanford (and Cal) features plenty of Cardinal-Golden Bear showdowns, even outside of the football game itself. There is the Big Game Blood Drive (who can donate more), the Big Drive (canned food collecting), and there is the most unique--and by far the most interesting--Stanford-Cal competition of all: The Big Wheel, a 5v5 unicycle basketball game.

That's right--during halftime of the Stanford women's basketball game today (11/19 vs. Pepperdine), rival unheralded unicycle basketball players will face off to determine who gets to hold the bragging rights as the better one-wheeled hoopsters. For those who care more about circuses and less about football, this game might be the one to watch this week.

This week on TUSGraph, I've prepared a lesson in sports history. The graph shows the points for (black) and against (red) USC over the past three years. That red line only occasionally peaks above the black one, but I've marked the only times anyone ever cares about USC at Stanford. I was hoping a visual representation might highlight two things:

1. How amazing our victory was in 2007
2. How amazing our victory was in 2009

Still not getting it? Pretend Stanford football is the guy, and USC is the watermelon.

Now for some predictions. Based on highly scientific math, we can predict the score of Big Game.

In 2007, we beat USC by 1 point, and Cal by 7.
In 2009, we beat USC by 34 points, and....

Well, it doesn't take a non-fuzzy to show that we're going to beat Cal by 238 points this year (34 * (7/1)). Thanks for following Graphematics!

BEAT CAL!

Jim Harbaugh might be the best thing that has ever happened to Stanford football. Since he became head coach, he has engineered a complete turnaround of the team--the culmination of which was yesterday's resounding defeat of USC. And while his ability and success would normally dictate a salary raise, I stand firm in my conviction that giving Jim Harbaugh an enormously lucrative new contract right now--as is about to happen--is reprehensible and shows that Stanford's priorities are extraordinarily misguided.

I don't even dislike Harbaugh--I might even have a touch of the wildly contagious Jim Harbaugh fever, which seems to be the newest incarnation of swine flu. But in the midst of an economic recession that has ravaged the athletics department, to increase Harbaugh's base salary to around 1.25 million dollars per year is ridiculous.

Two years ago, Stanford's football team needed a 4th and 10 one-handed catch in the endzone to defeat perennial football powerhouse USC. This year, the team not only upset USC again, but did it in style--winning by an improbably large 55-21 margin.

Granted, this win is slightly less heroic since Stanford (now 7-3) is actually a good team this year with an impressive record, and USC (now also 7-3) seems to be slowly fading from the heights they reached with Reggie Bush, Matt Leinart, and Carson Palmer. But USC football is still USC football, and Stanford football is still Stanford football, so any victory over the Trojans is impressive nonetheless.

Without much fanfare, the Athletics department has added new sports to the intramural lineup and moved registration online, thus fixing the dreaded who-wants-to-get-up-at-7-am-and-sign-our-team-up-for-IMs problem that previously existed.

The fall lineup now includes 4v4 Indoor Soccer and 4v4 Wallyball in addition to previous sports Flag Football and Ultimate Frisbee. I have no idea what 'Wallyball' is, but I certainly hope it has something to do with the lovable trash-compacting Pixar robot. Budget cuts: make trash-compacting and janitorial services into an IM sport, save the school money.

The department is also bringing back Innertube Water Polo, a former intramural sport, in the form of an Intramural Water Polo tournament. This is great news from both a fun-ness perspective and an anti-risk-management one, since the original IM Innertube Water Polo--one of the more popular IM sports of its time--was canceled because it seemed like too big of a liability.

There are also new Racquetball and Golf tournaments for people who prefer hitting things, and a Cardinal Adventure Challenge for people who love running around like a maniac before a severely limiting deadline.

Check it all out at the web site [https://www.stanford.edu/dept/pe/cgi-bin/], and major kudos to the Athletic department for listening to feedback and making great changes.

Every Stanford fan I know practically had an aneurysm when they heard Jim Harbaugh's critical comments about fan support. We know that Jim Harbaugh will someday leave Stanford, and by someday we don't mean in Joe Paterno years. No, it will likely be sooner rather than later. But it would be terrible to lose Harbaugh because of something within our control, i.e. attendance. If a Notre Dame or a USC or an Alabama (hypotheticals all, of course) happened to come calling, then whatever. I could deal with that. But I'd hate it to be because of something that seems to be within our control. Particularly when it would seem that the old verities about Stanford football have been swept away so dramatically and so quickly by Jim Harbaugh's regime: contrary to common belief, Stanford football can play tough, Stanford football can recruit well, Stanford football can finish close games. So I decided to undertake a study of Stanford football's attendance, to see whether Stanford football does, in fact, have a problem when it comes to fan support. Though the raw attendance can't tell us why these statistics are the way they are-they can't tell us if we happen to have Cal and Notre Dame scheduled the same year; they can't tell us about the economy-they can give us a small clue about the state of Stanford football fan support. I've decided to start with 2006, the first year of new Stanford Stadium. If anyone can find data prior to 2006, I'd be grateful. (Source is cnnsi.com. The data are available if you e-mail me at datahir AT stanford DOT edu)

Chris Marinelli did not lose the game last Saturday. Despite the undue focus on Marinelli, and the suggestion that “next time he ought to keep quiet” from the Notre Dame alums in the NBC broadcast booth—(wait, you mean they weren’t alums? But it makes so much sense!)—the offensive line played a pretty good game. The running game was strong once again, and the five sacks given up were partially mitigated by these two facts: 1) two of them appeared, to my untrained eyes, to be the tight end’s responsibility, 2) Tavita Pritchard is the QB they’re protecting for. No, he’s not slow by any means but still, his decision-making is poor. All this, and we’re down two starting guards: Gustav Rystedt hasn’t played a game this season and Chase Beeler was held out at game time. Whatever they’re paying Chris Dalman for his zone-blocking scheme, it’s clearly not enough.

From Sports Illustrated

For anyone having flashbacks during last week’s Oregon State game to UCLA, 2005, the similarities were strictly coincidental. Jim Harbaugh is NOT Walt Harris, and anyone suggesting this ought to be shipped to the nearest sanatorium.

That said, the game wasn’t exactly encouraging, either? The defense, in particular, worried me. The run defense was great; the pass defense not so much. Yes, I realize there were three turnovers, but the Oregon State passing offense moved the ball too well and too quickly on us. The problem was, I suspect, the secondary. When the secondary tried to play the Beaver wideouts close, they went long and over the top. Results: an easy touchdown and a should-have-been touchdown. When the secondary laid off—and this was most of the game—it was nothing but quick hitters, three step drops to the wideouts. This meant that the front seven couldn’t generate a lot of pressure, and the Oregon State offense nicked us, nearly to death.

Thank god for Bo McNally’s pick six, Toby Gerhardt and Catchings’ (ironic name in this instance) fumble into the endzone. But Arizona State’s probably a better team, so we simply cannot have the same flaws as last week in order to win. Carpenter’s a better QB than Moevao—he certainly won’t throw that boneheaded interception to McNally where McNally read his eyes for the entire play. On the other hand, Arizona State’s line is weak and their running game not particularly strong. I suspect a loss for Stanford, but Stanford will cover the spread. Then again--and this is a salient fact for anyone to remember--I don't actually know anything about football, I just want to finally see Stanford join the ranks of the mediocre and go to a bowl, dang it!

This weekend both the Stanford Men's and Women's Gymnastics competed in their first competition for the season. The men were away at Chicago for the Windy City Invitational while the women competed at home against Georgia, the defending national champions.

The Stanford Men's team went into Chicago on Saturday with a #1 preseason ranking - and we showed everyone that we deserved it. Facing off against Michigan, Illinois, UIC, Minnesota, Iowa and Ohio State, our Cardinal went for 354.450 to win the meet by a 7 point margin. David Sender (my roommate in Bob) won the individual all-around also by nearly 7 points over the 2nd place finisher. The men's have their first home meet on Saturday, January 26th in the Stanford Open. (If you haven't been to one, you have to go. Men's gymnastics meets are awesome).

The Women's team competed to an massive and enthusiastic crowd at Burnham Pavillion. Even with hitting 23 out of 24 routines, the Cardinal were unable to top Georgia, losing by only 7 tenths (196.875-196.150). Carly Janiga (who also lives in Bob) had the top beam score for the evening with a 9.9. The girls compete again at home on Sunday, January 20th against University of Arizona.

Did you see this? I know, it was a while ago, but just thought it's nice to know...

http://gostanford.cstv.com/genrel/103107aaa.html

Stanford Athletics Announces Free Admission Policy to Many Athletic Events
All but seven sports now free to fans, students and public

Oct. 31, 2007

Attending many of Stanford's regular season athletic events will now be free after a new policy announced today by Bob Bowlsby, the Jaquish and Kenninger Director of Athletics. The new policy, effective immediately, provides for free admission to all previously ticketed athletic events with the exception of football, men's and women's basketball, women's volleyball, baseball, and men's and women's soccer.

"We are pleased to make most of our athletic events free to our students, fans and members of the community," said Bowlsby. "Our belief is that open access would enhance the attendance, allow the Stanford community to experience the excitement and entertainment of intercollegiate athletics and thereby make it a better competitive environment for our teams."

Along with the seven sports that will continue to charge an admission fee, one other event will also charge admission: the Stanford Invitational Track Meet on April 4-5, 2008. All other previously ticketed athletic events will be free.

Effective immediately, free access will be provided to the following sports: men's volleyball, men's and women's gymnastics, men's and women's water polo, lacrosse, men's and women's tennis, softball, men's and women's swimming and diving, synchronized swimming, wrestling and men's and women's track and field (with the exception of the Stanford Invitational).

There will also be no admission fees for men's and women's golf, men's and women's rowing, field hockey, fencing, squash and sailing, for which there has not been an admission fee in the past.

The new policy includes regular season events only and does not include special events, post-season or NCAA championships .

Today, the Stanford Axe Committee announced the second annual BEAT CAL pictures contest! Created as a way to tie together students, alumni, and other Cardinal fans from around the word in a show of school spirit, last year's contest elicited submissions from as far as Paris (right) and even the battlegrounds of Iraq. To submit your photo, email it to beatcalpictures@gmail.com by November 24th, 2007. The top student and top alumni photo will be announced during Big Game Week. The winning prize: eternal glory.

Entries will be judged on creativity of composition, boldness of statement, artistry, and intangibles. Just to give you some ideas, previous BEAT CAL banners have been seen on the Leaning Tower of Pisa, on the side of Meyer Library, and on the Great Wall of China. But not every banner has to be huge. My favorite BEAT CAL picture of all time is an astronaut alum (Scott Parazynski, '83, MD '89) holding a small BEAT CAL sign in the space station Mir. Here is a description written by Chris Chapman '08 about last year's Stanford-in-Paris student photo winner:

We had a lot of fun doing this! We met just across the Seine from the tower at the Trocadero plaza. It was a beautiful Thursday afternoon -- luckily, as it may have been the last day of blue sky for the month! We got a lot of stares and laughs with our giant cardboard posters, and many people stopped to take their own photos -- including Sami Bendak, the father of a recent graduate. We quickly took as many shots as we could, as most of us had to run back to class! We all thought that this one came out as the best of the series. We hope you like it as much as we do!

MATT SAYLES / Associated Press

Stanford shocks No. 2 USC on late TD pass, four Booty interceptions (AP)
Stanford topples USC: What the upset means to Cal(college hotline)


An email from Dean Julie:

WE BEAT USC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am speechless, breathless and
FIRED UP.
They're flying back tonight, expected to arrive at midnight at
Arrillaga. Let's bring the entire Red Zone out to applaud the
amazing Stanford Cardinal when they get home! Bring
everyone! Forward this to everyone! WHOSE HOUSE? OUR HOUSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dean Julie

A crazy, ridiculous game.
A crazy ridiculous night.
Discuss.

In my role on staff at the university, I'm constantly on the lookout for how Stanford students and faculty are making waves in the blogosphere. As it so happens, a Stanford senior honors thesis by Jonathan Gibbs ('07) recently popped up on TrueHoop -- which is not only my favorite basketball blog, but may well be my favorite blog altogether.

In the wake of the Tim Donaghy NBA referee scandal, Gibbs' honors thesis (Point Shaving in the NBA: An Economic Analysis of the National Basketball Association's Point Spread Betting Market) has become the buzz of the basketball and Freakonomics blogging communities. TrueHoop has had multiple posts on Gibbs' work, which include an interview with Gibbs and Prof. Roger Noll chiming in as well. The thesis also makes a cameo on the widely-read Freakonomics blog. The TrueHoop postings are a great read, and I highly recommend them beginning with this one.

One thing I find quite interesting is a general lack of faith displayed toward undergraduate scholarship. In his initial posting on TrueHoop, Henry Abbott captures the essence of this attitude: "Hold the phone: An undergraduate? Do we really have to listen to this?"

Scout.com

Stanford Football fans, do not despair!

Well, you maybe can despair for this season, the 2007 campaign, but by 2008 we should be on our road to recovery, fighting on with "enthusiasm unknown to mankind," as Head Coach Jim Harbaugh put it.

Why? We've just signed one of the hugest recruits in the history of recent Stanford football.

Palo Alto, introducing Andrew Luck (get the post's title now?), the #6 ranked QB in the nation. He has just verbally committed to Stanford Football.

TheBootleg's headline says we've "struck gold in Texas." According to the Houston Chronicle, Luck led the Spartans to a 10-2 record and a trip to the area round of the Division II Class 5A state playoffs last season. He passed for 2,909 yards and 27 touchdowns with only six interceptions while completing 69 percent of his passes. Damn.

According to Scout.com, Luck's also the top student in his class of 500 and got a 1900/2400 on the SAT, as a sophomore.

It seems like he's legit, on both the athletic front as well as the academic. The only thing that scares me is that verbal agreements are not binding, meaning Luck can always pull the carpet out from under our and Harbaugh's feet.

Andrew, buddy, please don't do that, ok?

I got news of a highly dumb plan from Stanford Football via my e-mail. Apparently, they're limiting student section seating to 3,000 for Big Game and making eligibility for one of those tickets contingent on attendance.

Now, if I might be permitted to vent a bit: what a retarded, retarded plan. Who thought of this? "Hmm...well, we had attendance problems for our highly bad team last year in our new stadium. With all evidence pointing towards an equally dismal season, the clear move is to make it harder for people to go to our most popular game." Why antagonize people like this? And why would you screw over the rest of your non-student season ticket holders by separating the Notre Dame and Cal games from the rest of the package? Shouldn't you be conciliatory and trying to make the experience better? It's not as if you're USC or Notre Dame or Florida here, where people will line up for tix. How many people, instead of going to Big Game, just say, "Whatever. Not worth the effort." Genius plan from the suits in marketing...

ADDENDUM: Some might claim that the purpose of this plan is to keep Cal fans out (as there isn't enough room in Stanford Stadium for all the Cal fans who want to come). If so, that's not a smart move, seeing as it excludes actual students. Just make getting a student ticket contingent on a student ID if so.

Email posted below.

From GoStanford.com:

Cleveland, Ohio - Stanford has continued its record win streak in the U.S. Sports Academy Directors' Cup competition by securing its 13th consecutive award at the Division I level. The honor is presented annually by NACDA and the United States Sports Academy to the program that wins the nation's only all-sports competition in intercollegiate athletics in the country.

National championships in women's cross country and men's golf led Stanford to the honor. Stanford also had runner-up finishes in men's swimming and diving, women's volleyball and women's water polo. A total of 15 Stanford teams contributed Top 10 national finishes, while Stanford scored in 18 of 20 sports allowed in the standings.

Stanford has scored 1345.50 points through June 12 with the final point totals for all schools scheduled and final standings to be released June 28 following the conclusion of the 2007 NCAA Division I College Baseball World Series. The Cardinal currently has a commanding 296.50 point lead over second place UCLA (1049.00).

Go Stanford!

March Madness is over. Say that to a basketball fan, for the reaction. If said basketball fan expresses nothing but regret, well, let’s just say he and I aren’t on the same wavelength. If, on the other hand, that basketball fan says, “Yeah, and I can’t wait for the NBA playoffs,” then we’re in agreement. For basketball fans like me and this hypothetical fan, the NBA playoffs are pure—we don’t have the hype machine like with college basketball, and we don’t have to deal with the silliness of some basketball people insulting another.

Every season during March Madness, writers and broadcasters feel the need to reaffirm their brand of the sport over the professional version. The professional version, we hear, is populated by thugs and lazy bums. They’re all flashy showmen who only care about the dunk and can’t shoot the midrange jumper. They’re all disloyal assholes who are seeking to kill their coach. They’re unruly motherfuckers.

That’s why you always see columnists urging kids to stay in school! It’s the only place you can learn how to play the game, and perhaps something about life as well! The money can wait! Have fun now! Etc., etc.

This post could be three hundred or three thousand words, and for the sake of my grades, I choose three hundred. Suffice it to say, it's a shame to see the players and the coaching staff give such a desultory effort. It's a shame to see failures to inbound the ball and to regress to our earlier free-throw form. It's a shame that we appeared completely unprepared--we've seen the press before (whatever Goods had to say about it in postgame conference), and, hint, Fred Washington is good at breaking it. And it's a shame that we have to listen to shit about how we didn't deserve to be there for the rest of the summer.

Stanford's Brook Lopez, right, and Robin Lopez watch the closing minutes against Louisville in a first round basketball game of the South Regional of the NCAA Tournament in Lexington, Ky., Thursday, March 15, 2007. Louisville defeated Stanford 78-58. (AP Photo/Al Behrman; retrieved from ESPN.com)

I was definitely sweating it for a while, but I’m glad we made it.
Now, obviously we shouldn’t be satisfied with just making it, but considering we were one of the last teams to get in, it’s definitely nice to make it.

Last night, Stanford's men's gymnastics team defeated #2 Penn State and #9 Iowa at the last home meet of the year. It was one of the most exciting meets of my life, my voice is hoarse from all the screaming. I'm a junior on the gymnastics team, but redshirting due to a knee injury.

It was certainly an amazing send off for the class of 2007, Brice Rolston, Alex Schorsch, Dylan Carney, Peter Derman and Josh Goldman, all whom were honored at the meet. Penn State is hosting NCAAs and this was a huge victory for us and fuels our momentum into the post-season. We have conference championships during Spring Break and 2 weeks into spring quarter we will be at Penn State to chase the NCAA title. Wish us good luck!

If you have never seen a gymnastics meet, you have to come see one. See our youtube videos.

The loss tonight to USC in overtime, it wasn’t the Trojans beating us, it was their adversaries, the Greeks who did us in. In Greek tragedy, of course, it is hubris and one fatal flaw coming back to haunt you that ultimately dooms the protagonist. That’s what just happened to Stanford.

[9:56PM - Breaking News: Apparently six Stanford basketball players have food poisoning. Sounds like Arizona will win tomorrow.]

The game tomorrow is mostly for seeding purposes, and as a clincher. If we win, we clinch and get a much better seed. If we lose, no big deal, we’re still probably in the tournament. The game is also important as a pre-tournament scouting report. Do we go into the tournament with momentum, or not?

Last time, we played Arizona close, despite the deceiving final score. Most of the game was close until a late 19-6 run. That was at home, and Arizona was playing much better at that time, so this game is certainly within reach.

It’ll be great to see us in March Madness, and it’s great to see us win comfortably over a bad team. There were no jitters here.

THE GOOD:

Fred Washington. He had a great offensive game; he attacked the basket and got to the line thirteen times. Damn, that’s good. Defense was a little off but still pretty good.

Mitch Johnson and his Juvenation Machine: I’m afraid I’ll jinx his shooting touch; let’s just move on here…

Lawrence Hill: Glad to see him get back to his high-scoring, inside-out efficiency game.

THE BAD on the other hand...

Barring an unexpected upset tomorrow, we should be invited to the NCAA Tournament once again this year. Arizona State only has one win in the Pac-10, and sure, they’ve lost by small margins, but they’ve lost 14 games all the same. They play a slow, plodding pace which is perfect for us—we don’t want our big guys running around, especially with run n’ gun Arizona coming in on Saturday. Their best player is a forward, not a guard and they shoot the three poorly. If we lose tomorrow, either Arizona State got extremely lucky, or we played extremely poorly, or more probably a combination of both happened.

With that being said, I’m really pleased by just making it, as we’re a team composed mostly of freshmen and sophomores and have no real bench to speak of (yet—next year Will Paul and Landry Fields could provide sparks alongside Taj Finger). The next question is, of course, how well can we expect to do?

Well, the prerequisite to our doing well is this: will Anthony Goods be back, and will he be at least 75% of his former self?