I fully expect a thoroughly embarrassing Stanford attendance showing when Stanford and TCU square off tonight, that makes people across the country wonder why Stanford even bothers with football.

But there is one level of humiliation that can't be topped. It's one thing for Notre Dame and Oregon to outdraw Stanford at a home game, and do it by a 2-1 margin. It's probably another if TCU can draw more fans to Stanford than Stanford can. Please tell me if y'all think TCU could outdraw Stanford tonight.

I'm at this moment not expecting TCU to outdraw Stanford, but if I am wrong, I want to be set straight, so I can be prepared to witness it.

Read and watch that here.

Read and watch that here.

Read and watch that here.

Read that here.

Here are the things I'm looking for in the season opener tomorrow -

Offense

1. How good is the O line in giving some protection to the quarterbacks?
2. Do we actually have a run game? Can anyone other than our quarterbacks actually give us run yards?
3. Does the depth in the WR room actually, show up at game time?
4. Can we minimize turnovers and protect the ball?

Defense

1. Can we actually defend the run?
2. Can our corners keep up with their receivers?
3. How many sacks can we get?

Besides winning the game, which would be nice. It would be great to see some progress on some of these other dimensions.

RG

I was thinking it would be interesting to try to get a picture on who these last few wild years of college football (transfer portal, NIL, realignment) have been good to and who they have been bad to. There are lots of ways to look at this but the one that pops in my mind as interesting for the moment is to compare on-paper talent from before things really took off and now. Different baselines would lead to different results and other analyses may be interested in looking at on-field results rather than on-paper talent, but at least for my purposes for now I was interested in this. Power Four teams ranked in terms of +/- placements in the 2021 vs. 2024 247 team talent composite rankings:

1. Colorado (+32)
2. SMU (+30)
3. Louisville (+23)
4. Kansas (+22)
5. Syracuse (+18)
6. Purdue (+16)
7. Arizona State (+13)
8. Missouri (+12)
8. Cincinnati (+12)
10. Vanderbilt (+10)
11. Texas Tech (+7)
12. Kansas State (+6)
13. Minnesota (+5)
14. Penn State (+4)
14. Florida State (+4)
14. TCU (+4)
17. UCF (+3)
17. Pitt (+3)
19. Texas (+2)
19. Oklahoma (+2)
19. Florida (+2)
19. Tennessee (+2)
19. Ole Miss (+2)
19. Kentucky (+2)
25. Oregon (+1)
25. Nebraska (+1)
25. Wisconsin (+1)
25. Virginia (+1)
25. Wake Forest (+1)
30. Alabama (even)
30. Georgia (even)
30. Ohio State (even)
30. Clemson (even)
30. Notre Dame (even)
30. Auburn (even)
30. South Carolina (even)
30. Utah (even)
30. Cal (even)
30. Virginia Tech (even)
40. LSU (-1)
40. Arkansas (-1)
40. Iowa (-1)
40. Rutgers (-1)
44. Miami (-2)
44. UCLA (-2)
44. BYU (-2)
47. Texas A&M (-3)
47. Michigan (-3)
47. NC State (-3)
47. Baylor (-3)
51. USC (-4)
52. Mississippi State (-5)
52. Arizona (-5)
54. North Carolina (-6)
54. Northwestern (-6)
54. Illinois (-6)
54. Duke (-6)
58. Michigan State (-7)
58. Iowa State (-7)
60. West Virginia (-10)
61. Houston (-11)
62. Oklahoma State (-13)
63. Washington (-15)
64. Georgia Tech (-16)
64. Maryland (-16)
64. Boston College (-16)
67. Indiana (-18)
68. Stanford (-19)

No longer Power Four (or do they count for now?):

Washington State (-2 but already a cellar talent level))
Oregon State (-19)

This does not precisely measure who is up/down due to transfer portal, NIL, and realignment. As we know very well from the David Shaw Experience, there are other factors - like an imploding program - that can impact this. Some programs may be up/down due to the three environmental factors I mentioned but also due to other rhythms in their programs or even just variance. Nonetheless, I think it's interesting to get a picture on whose talent is most/least changed from a few years ago.

Caveat aside, the above does provide a bit of a picture. Everybody knows Colorado, SMU, Louisville, and Kansas have been the biggest winners nationally of the last few years. Interesting for us to see Syracuse as a third ACC team near the top of the mover's list. On the other side of the spectrum, nobody has experienced a bigger negative shock than us the last few years and only a handful are even in the vicinity.

In terms of the conference we're joining, seven teams are on the positive side of the ledger, three are in the middle (as is Notre Dame), and seven are on the negative side of the ledger (including us). Some up, some down, no clear bonus or detriment to the ACC relative to the rest of the power conferences when it comes to on-paper talent shifts the last few years. But again, the ACC does have a striking concentration of the very most benefited teams. It strikes me that the SMU, Louisville, Syracuse trio's gains are a significant thing in the ACC landscape. And on the flip side Stanford, Boston College, and Georgia Tech make a striking concentration of the most disadvantaged teams. I don't know what to make of these polarities.

I now live two blocks away from Colorado's stadium.

My apartment's parking lot is full of fan's cars at the moment.

We don't appreciate enough how sweet tailgating on The Farm is. And I envy you who will be doing so tomorrow. Enjoy!