ESPN College Football

I wanted to follow up on the Most Important Game series Ted and I have been doing in the Pac-12 blog. Yesterday Ted gave you his thoughts on Stanford's most important game -- and he understandably picked The Big Game against Cal on Oct. 20.

Hard to argue with that. But for kicks and giggles, I'd like to offer a contrarian perspective. I wholeheartedly agree Cal is the biggest game of the year for Stanford. It is every year. No debating that. But is it the most important? I think a strong argument can be made that Sept. 27 at Washington is more important for the trajectory of the season.

Consider:

I don't think anyone anticipates the Cardinal dropping the first two games to San Jose State or Duke. Those will essentially be learning-curve games for the new quarterback, his new offensive linemen and it will basically be live 11-on-11 work for the new-look secondary. Because we all know what awaits them in Week 3.

I'll have plenty to say about the Stanford-USC game in tomorrow's Take 2 in the Pac-12 blog. But win or lose against the Trojans, what happens the following week is crucial for the remainder of the season.

If Stanford tops USC at home, the team will have a ton of confidence heading to Seattle. But if the Cardinal fall to USC -- and you have to figure they'll be considerable home dogs -- it will be the first dent in the new quarterback's confidence. Then he's got a bye week to get his head on straight before starting his first college football game on the road -- against another Heisman hopeful quarterback in Keith Price and a completely revamped Huskies defense.

The first goal for the Cardinal is to win the Pac-12 North. Winning your division should be the top goal for every team -- because a lot of doors close without that division title. And we all know the road to the North crown goes through Oregon. But Washington and Stanford are both jockeying to be the team to challenge Oregon. The winner takes a huge step forward.

And don't think Washington has forgotten about last year's tushy-whooping on The Farm. Make no mistake about it -- Washington wants revenge and wants it in grand fashion.

With the majority of Stanford's marquee games on the road this year -- at Notre Dame, at Cal, at Oregon -- getting that first road victory is going to be extremely important. Because the next road game is in South Bend, Ind., and the one after that is across the Bay at Cal.

A victory over Washington puts Stanford at 3-1, a far more advantageous psychological position than 2-2. Stanford and its new quarterback will have to learn to win on the road. And winning the first one against a quality opponent -- or losing a revenge game -- could alter the entire landscape of the 2012 season.

We've seen David Shaw the offensive coordinator; David Shaw the head coach, recruiter and motivator. We've seen the David Shaw who gets perturbed when his strategies are questioned and the David Shaw who is humbled by praise and deflects kudos onto his assistants and players.

But there's one David Shaw we're yet to see: David Shaw the disciplinarian.

While so much of the attention heading into next season's opener against San Jose State was going to focus on who would start at quarterback, now we must also turn our attention to the defensive side of the ball and wonder who will be starting at inside linebacker. And for all the wrong reasons.

If memory serves, there were no players suspended or forced to miss time for violating team rules in the 2011 season. If there were, it wasn't made public and they weren't starters. But Shayne Skov is one of the best linebackers in the country, a poster boy for hard work and probably the most visible player on the 2012 roster. Whatever course of action Shaw takes in dealing with Skov's reported DUI will serve as a precedent for how all other disciplinary actions are taken.

I think it's safe to assume he's not going to dismiss Skov from the team -- as Mike Leach did yesterday with Washington State linebacker C.J. Mizell. Skov has neither the history nor the offense to warrant that severe of a punishment. He's a good teammate, a good student -- and if you work in the media -- a pretty good quote. All in all, he's a good guy who made a beyond-idiotic mistake.

But Shaw can't let this slide with a couple extra laps after practice and a stern talking-to, either. Skov put his life and the lives of others in jeopardy when he decided to knock back x-amount of cocktails and then turn the key.

Shaw hasn't made any comments about the incident other than an official statement issued through the school. But if David Shaw the disciplinarian is anything like the head coach, he'll approach it in the same, cool and even-tempered demeanor in which he approaches most things. But if anyone saw how distressed Shaw was when talking about Skov's injury back in Tucson, or the way he exploded in Pullman following an illegal hit on Chris Owusu, it's clear he loves his players and he's going to have their back. That makes whatever decision to come that much harder.

A suspension is certainly in order. How many games is the question. Clouding the issue is Skov's health. He's still recovering from a knee injury and we won't know if he'll be 100 percent to start the season. If he is fully healthy -- and he's suspended for the San Jose State and Duke games -- that seems fair.

But if he's still a couple of weeks away from being healthy when the season starts -- and he's suspended for both of those games -- is it really a just punishment? Suspending him for games he might have not played in -- or only played a minor role -- seems like doling out discipline with a dust pan rather than an iron fist.

Which brings us to the third game of the season: USC. This is one of the marquee games on Stanford's 2012 schedule and a true measuring stick for the Cardinal in the post-Andrew Luck era. Stanford doesn't need Skov to beat USC. Stanford doesn't need Skov at all -- for that matter. But they are a better team with him.

Whatever punishment Skov is to serve should begin when he's ready to play football. If that's the third game of the season, so be it. Using Skov's injury as a subterfuge for suspension would be letting him off the hook and a disservice to the position Shaw holds.

Shaw is, above all, a Stanford man. Now it's up to him -- David Shaw the disciplinarian -- to back up the ideals he so frequently preaches.

Well, apparently I rattled up quite the hornet's nest a couple of days ago in the mailbag by taking the under in a reader question wanting to know my opinion on the over/under for 8.5 for wins for Stanford next season.

Most seemed to think I was being too harsh and that nine or 10 wins were more likely than the seven or eight wins I'm forecasting. (This total doesn't include a bowl game, mind you).

OK, I'm not afraid to show my work on a way-too-early analysis of each game. Naturally, this is based off the personnel we know is available, the assumption there are no catastrophic injuries and little more than gut feelings.

• Sept. 1 vs. San Jose State: Cardinal will be multi-touchdown favorites and will cruise behind a monster running attack. Good game for the new signal caller to get his feet wet. Win (1-0).
• Sept. 8. vs. Duke: Offense won't be as vanilla as the week before as they start adding new elements for the first-year starting quarterback. There will be a couple of mistakes, but Geoff Meinken will stiff-arm the Cardinal to a comfortable victory. Win (2-0).
• Sept. 15 vs. USC: I don't see this as a blowout that some seem to think it will be. The Cardinal will control the clock with the rushing attack and David Shaw has always been a very good play-caller against USC. But the Matt Barkley-led Trojans finally get a win over Stanford. Loss (2-1).
• Sept. 22 Bye: Good time to recover from first loss of the year and prep for first road trip of the season.
• Sept 27 at Washington: What? You mean we have to play outside of California? Tough place to play and Keith Price is only getting better. Maybe the Huskies will have some defense to speak of? No Chris Polk hurts, but the Cardinal still won't be able to keep up. The one thing that might sway this is Stanford coming out of the bye week. But I wouldn't expect 446 rushing yards this time around. Loss (2-2).
• Oct. 6 vs. Arizona: Students are finally back on campus and realize there is a football game. Not sure what to make of the Rich Rodriguez Wildcats yet, but Stanford should be the better team and getting Arizona earlier in the season is always helpful when a new coaching staff is involved. Win (3-2).
• Oct. 13 at Notre Dame: I'm expecting the Irish to have their third quarterback controversy of the season by this point. Stepfan Taylor has a huge game on the road and continues to be the most underrated running back in the conference. Cardinal pull this one out. Win (4-2).
• Oct. 20 at Cal: A Big Game before Halloween? Spooky. New quarterbacks are always good for at least one road loss in games they are favored to win. Given the magnitude of this game, this might be that one. Loss (4-3).
• Oct. 27 vs. Washington State: Cougars throw for 400 yards, but Cardinal score more points. Win (5-3).
• Nov. 3 at Colorado: Buffs still not ready to make a move. Cardinal cruise. Win (6-3).
• Nov. 10 vs. Oregon State: With bowl eligibility locked up, the Cardinal are looking to improve their postseason status. Whoever is playing quarterback has the offense figured out and Taylor will surpass the 1,000-yard mark for the third straight year. Should be a great way to honor him on senior night. But this could also be a trap game. OSU played a lot of youth last season that has to grow up sometime. Win (7-3).
• Nov. 17 at Oregon: Yeah ... not going to happen. Loss (7-4).
• Nov. 24 at UCLA: I think this could be a swing game for both teams. But my best guess is UCLA is still a year away from making real noise. Win (8-4).

Here's a look at Stanford's schedule in 2012 (all games on a Saturday unless otherwise noted). Let the win-loss debate begin.

• Sept. 1 San Jose State at Stanford
• Sept. 8 Duke at Stanford
• Sept. 15 USC at Stanford
• Sept. 22 Bye
• (Thursday) Sept. 27 Stanford at Washington
• Oct. 6 Arizona at Stanford
• Oct. 13 Stanford at Notre Dame
• Oct. 20 Stanford at Cal
• Oct. 27 Washington State at Stanford
• Nov. 3 Stanford at Colorado
• Nov. 10 Oregon State at Stanford
• Nov. 17 Stanford at Oregon
• Nov. 24 Stanford at UCLA
• Nov. 30: Pac-12 Football Championship Game (just for those of you with extra high hopes).

First thoughts:

• Nice to open up with three straight at home, but a big challenge early against USC. The bye week right afterward helps getting whoever is at quarterback ready for his first trip as a starter to Washington.
• Traveling to Notre Dame is always tough -- no matter who is playing quarterback. Takes away the sting of back-to-back road games when you don't have to leave the region to play Cal.
• About the Big Game being played so early, Stanford athletic director Bob Bowlsby said this through a release from the school: “The October 20 date for Big Game is 2012 is certainly not our first choice but the conference is governed by the will of the majority and we have a duty to respect the outcome of the vote. We will work with California and the Pac-12 office to advocate for the Big Game and all rivalry games to be scheduled toward the end of the season in future years.”
• By my count, Stanford should have bowl eligibility by, at the very least, the end of the Colorado game -- though the Notre Dame-Cal stretch will be critical. Winning both would be outstanding, splitting would be passable, but dropping both could be a momentum killer because the Cardinal have three very winnable games (home to WSU, at Colorado, home to OSU) heading into Oregon.
• Would rather face UCLA with new coach Jim Mora early in the season while things are still getting sorted out. By the final week, the Bruins will know what they are doing (for better or worse). Plus, depending on how things play out, it's not out of the realm of possibility that UCLA might need that final game to clinch bowl eligibility.
• The extra time to study in between Washington and Arizona will be helpful for prepping against the new-look, Rich Rodriguez-led Wildcats.
• Having five of the final seven games on the road is going to be rough. But better to have it that way than five of the first seven on the road with a new quarterback.

As previously mentioned in the mailbag, I see eight wins -- though I wouldn't be shocked at seven. Anything over eight would be a bonus and anything under seven would be a disappointment. I think the schedule works out nicely for a team with a new quarterback and one that will certainly be under the spotlight once again next season, albeit for different reasons than this year.

No. 6 Stanford faces its first significant test of the season Saturday at Arizona, where the spirited 'Zona Zoo can be a challenge for opposing offenses.

The game has the potential to be highly entertaining, at least if you like A-list quarterbacks. Stanford's Andrew Luck is a leading Heisman Trophy candidate and likely will be the top over all pick in next spring's NFL draft, while Arizona's Nick Foles has put up huge numbers so far and could join Luck in the draft's first round.

Stanford blogger Kevin Gemmell and Pac-12 blogger Ted Miller decided there was plenty to discuss.

Kevin Gemmell: Ted, I think it's commonly accepted that Stanford quarterback Andrew Luck is the Heisman front-runner and will be the No. 1 pick in the NFL draft. But I couldn't help notice Arizona quarterback Nick Foles getting some love in last week's Heisman poll. Stanford's secondary has been its weakest cog through two weeks of the season. Foles will be, by far, the most accurate quarterback they have faced this season when they roll into Tucson on Saturday. That has me wondering. Do we have this all wrong? Is Foles the Pac-12 quarterback we should be focusing on and not Luck?

Ted Miller: Well, Luck is Luck, considered by many to be the best quarterback prospect in a decade. He’s the total package and almost certain top pick in the NFL draft this spring. More than a few folks believe, however, that Foles, if he turns in a good season, also could find his way into the first round of the NFL draft. He’s a big guy with a good arm and is very accurate. Further, as a third-year starter, he’s experienced. He’s not going to get surprised. And he will tax the Stanford pass defense, particularly if he gets receiver Juron Criner back. My guess is Luck will look longingly at Foles’ receivers.

The problem for Foles and Arizona, though, is five new offensive line starters. They’ve done OK pass blocking, but the Wildcats run game has been mostly nonexistent. Seems like the Stanford front seven has been stout thus far. We knew the linebackers would be good. Tell me about the defensive line.

Kevin Gemmell: You're right about the linebackers. They are good. And a significant reason they are good is because of that defensive line. As you know, linebackers rule in the 3-4 scheme, and the boys up front are there to occupy the blockers. But here's the catch. They are doing more than that. Matt Masifilo, Terrence Stephens and Ben Gardner have also been making tackles and getting to the quarterback. Those three have combined for 13 tackles, five tackles for losses of 25 yards, two sacks, a fumble recovery and a pass breakup in the first two games. First they occupy the block, then they shed it just as quickly. Where the Stanford defense has had some problems through the first couple of weeks has been in the secondary. It hasn't really been "burned" by any big plays, but the defenders have missed tackles which have led to a few big plays. They have created the big play on their own. Never a good thing. San Jose State and Duke completed 62 percent of their passes against the Cardinal. Not great numbers, but better than you'd expect from a couple of lower-tier teams. What's going to happen when an accurate passer like Foles gets in there?

Ted Miller: Well, the Stanford secondary then is going to need to buckle up because while there’s talk of trying for some balance in Tucson, it’s really going to be about Foles and the passing game. Of course, as good as Foles is and as deep as the Wildcats receivers are, the offense is not the same without Criner, who it’s fair to say is questionable after having an appendectomy last week. With Criner, Foles has a big target who’s a deep threat and has a knack for making big plays. Without him, the passing attack lacks that obvious go-to target. That Cardinal secondary, which only lost cornerback Richard Sherman from 2010, did a good job against Foles last year, holding him to 248 yards passing -- 5.2 yards per completion -- with a touchdown and an interception from Sherman. Foles has to win that battle, though, for the Wildcats to have a chance for the upset. He’ll need another 400-yard passing game.

What about the other side of the ball? While Luck is back and looking good, despite losing his top-two receivers from 2010, how has the personality of the offense changed after the departure of coach Jim Harbaugh and some key players? Arizona coach Mike Stoops said the Cardinal had been “vanilla” in the first two games. Are we going to see some new things this weekend?

Kevin Gemmell: The personality is a lot like David Shaw. Balanced. You haven't seen "Heisman-esque" numbers out of Luck, because he doesn't play in a five-wide spread offense. They want to establish the run, be physical, and then pick their moments to take the shots down the field. The running game has been hit-and-miss to this point. But that's to be expected with three new starters on the offensive line. Some readers have commented to me that they think Stanford has lost its "swagger" sans Harbaugh. I couldn't disagree more. There is plenty of swagger to go around, and 101 points in two games to back that up.

Shaw heard the "vanilla" comment, and he called it a fair assessment. But so far we've seen a flea-flicker and a nifty little shovel pass. Not entirely vanilla. There's nothing wrong with showing other teams on film that you have those clubs in your bag. And they've also shown a lot of their three tight-end formations. Talk about mismatch issues! Stanford has three tight ends -- two of them 6-foot-6 and another at 6-8 -- who would create matchup problems for any defense in this country. Those tight ends have more than made up for the missing wide receivers from last season. And speaking of the receivers, even though Chris Owusu hasn't had that "big play," he is coming off a 100-yard receiving game against Duke, and Griff Whalen has proven to be a nice presence underneath.

Let's call it vanilla with sprinkles, cookie dough and a drizzle of caramel sauce.

OK, Ted. Prediction time. You're the Pac-12 veteran. How do you see this one playing out?

Ted Miller: It would be a lot easier, Kevin, if we knew if Criner was going to play. My hunch is no. But I still wouldn’t pick the Wildcats in this one because they lack a running game to help Foles, and the young offensive line is going to struggle with the Cardinal front seven. Still, Arizona plays better in front of the ‘Zona Zoo, one of the best home crowds in the Pac-12. My pick is a competitive 35-24 victory for Stanford, with the Cardinal asserting itself in the fourth quarter.

What’s your take?

Kevin Gemmell: Truly, great minds think alike. I had Stanford pegged at 35-24 in my Thursday prediction. I'm looking for a lot more running out the of the Cardinal than people are probably expecting in a game with two marquee quarterbacks. I think the Cardinal are a little tired of hearing the folks say they haven't played anyone yet. Not that Arizona is Alabama or Oklahoma -- but a win against an above average Pac-12 team on the road would go a long way toward silencing some of their critics. Foles is going to get his stats, but Stanford will get the win.

PALO ALTO, Calif., -- Is it worth getting picky over a pick? Stanford coach David Shaw thinks so.

That’s why he wanted to wait and watch the game film before making any sort of judgment on Andrew Luck’s first and only interception of the season, which came in the final five minutes of the first half Saturday against Duke.

Shaw said his initial thought was that there might have been pass interference.

With the Cardinal clinging to a 10-0 lead, it looked like they might be poised for another score before the break (which they did after enduring a surprise Duke onside kick and a great effort from the defense).

On third-and-8 at the Duke 38 yard line, Luck was working from the shotgun in a four-receiver set. The blocking wasn't airtight and Luck took a hit after he threw the ball. But he had enough time to pump fake a drag to wide receiver Griff Whalen before looking to Chris Owusu on a 7-yard up-and-in. I counted, unofficially, four seconds from snap to throw.

The pass looked to be a little behind Owusu, though not outlandishly uncatchable. It bounced, and then fell right into the hands of Duke’s Lee Butler, who went 76 yards untouched for the score. It was Luck’s first pick-six since at Arizona in 2009.

At question is whether the defender on Owusu, Duke’s Johnny Williams, was getting a little too handsy.

“I need to see that one that was intercepted,” Shaw said. “It looked like there was a lot of contact on Chris Owusu. The ball wasn’t that high and he couldn’t get up. Whether it was pass interference or not? We’ll need to watch it on film.”

As the pocket started to collapse, Luck said he felt the pressure – and he had been hit a few times leading up to that point. He took the blame – as any quarterback worth their salt should do on an interception – regardless of who is at fault.

“That was truly a poor decision that might have come about by them having a little more pressure,” Luck said. “But it’s something I wish I could take back. But maybe the pressure did have a correlation with that play.”

Have a look at the play and decide for yourself if there was pass interference.

Watch it all the way through, and appreciate the hustle from running back Stepfan Taylor. He didn't get there in time, but you have to love that he didn't give up on the play.

DURHAM, N.C. -- For the second straight week, Stanford’s offense tiptoed that ever-so-fine-line between sputtering and spectacular.

At times, they looked unstoppable. Others, leaky.

“Not good enough,” said quarterback Andrew Luck. “Definitely not in the first half. Not good enough … I made a mistake here. Another guy makes a mistake there. It’s hard to get into a rhythm when every other guy is making a mistake. But they had a good defense. They dialed up some stuff and had our number for a while.”

And yet the No. 6 team in the nation endured with a victory over Duke at Wallace Wade Stadium -- if you can call a 44-14 victory and 504 total yards of offense enduring.

But heading into the locker room at halftime with a flimsy 17-7 lead, coach David Shaw recognized that there were some issues.

“We didn’t make a lot of changes,” Shaw said. “We just charged our guys to play physical and make plays down the field.”

The second half was better -- and the Cardinal looked the part of a top-10 team. A closer examination of the stats shows that the Cardinal (2-0) actually had more yards in the first half, 253 to 251 in the second half. But numbers can lie.

The big difference came in the rushing attack. After 68 yards in the first half (including a paltry three yards in the second quarter), Stanford burst open for 137 rushing yards in the second half.

“The first half was a little disappointing,” said center Sam Schwartzstein. “But that’s the way football is. I’m happy with the way we answered some adversity.”

The root of the problem was Duke running delayed blitzes. It tripped up the pass protection and led to Luck taking more hits than his offensive line was comfortable allowing -- including two sacks (one by contact, the second out of bounds).

“Way too many,” said offensive tackle Jonathan Martin. “Our communication wasn’t all the way down. Guys were coming free who shouldn’t have come free. But we’re getting there.”

Luck finished the game 20-of-28 for 290 yards and four touchdowns. For the second-straight week, he was pulled in the second half.

“Pass protection-wise, it was the stunts [that bothered us],” Shaw said. “But as the game went on, our offensive line got better and better and better.”

It looked like Duke (0-2) might grab some momentum before halftime, when Lee Butler intercepted a tipped ball and returned it 76 yards for a touchdown -- cutting Stanford’s lead to 10-7 with 2:14 remaining.

Then Jekyll went to sleep and Hyde woke up. Stanford went from lethargic to lethal, needing only 43 seconds and four plays to move 59 yards for a 10-yard Luck-to-Chris Owusu touchdown. Stanford took a 17-7 lead at the break and never looked back. Owusu finished with seven catches for 106 yards.

“It’s one of the most difficult things in sports, to regain momentum and we couldn’t do that,” said Duke coach David Cutcliffe. “We didn’t make those plays to get that done.”

One area that appears to have no consistency issues is the run defense -- which was outstanding for the second week in a row. The Blue Devils were limited to just 30 rushing yards, and if not for a late touchdown with 57 seconds left in the game, the defense would have pitched a touchdown-free performance again.

“It was going to happen eventually,” joked linebacker Shayne Skov, who led the Cardinal with 11 tackles.

The front seven were relentless, notching six sacks and 14 tackles for a loss. Linebacker Chase Thomas looked like he was buying real estate in the Duke backfield, tallying 2.5 sacks and 3.5 tackles for a loss. After the Butler interception/touchdown, Duke shocked the Cardinal with an onside kick and recovered -- threatening to take the lead at the half. But the defense sacked Duke quarterback Sean Renfree twice in three plays, giving the ball back to the offense, which went on to score on the Owusu touchdown.

The secondary, however, continued to show holes. The Blue Devils threw for 305 yards and, had it not been for three missed field goals, the game might have been even tighter at the break.

In the second half, when the running game was cranking, the passing game opened up. For example, it allowed Stanford to run one of their three-tight-end sets. One goes to the post, one to the corner and the other up the middle. Coby Fleener was the guy who went up the middle, and the end result was a bullet from Luck, a mismatch for a shorter defender, and a 60-yard touchdown. The Cardinal went on to score touchdowns on their next four possessions.

“The shortest one (of the tight ends) is 6-5, so it’s pick your poison,” Shaw said. “When they are one-on-one, we feel like they are all open.”

Fleener had a stellar game, catching two balls -- both touchdowns -- for 63 yards. But he too saw the inconsistency on offense.

“I think everybody saw us stall a lot in the first half,” he said. “We can’t be like that if we expect to win games down the road. We need to play 60 minutes, start fast, and finish similar to the way we did tonight.”

Last week, Shaw received the game ball from his players for his first victory as Stanford’s head coach. Saturday night, in a game of two halves, it wasn’t so clear.

So who gets it this week?

“We’ll watch film before we decide,” Shaw said.

Probably a good call. Numbers lie.

DURHAM, N.C. -- A closer look at Stanford and Duke at halftime at Wallace Wade Stadium:

Stat of the half: Duke is losing this game far more than Stanford is winning it. The Blue Devils are 0-for-7 on third-down conversion attempts and have missed three field goals (though, to their credit, the Blue Devils are 2-for-2 on fourth-down conversions).

Stat of the half, take 2: Andrew Luck has taken more punishment in the first half than probably was expected. He's been knocked down three times and sacked once.

Best play: Can't be the pick six, because it literally fell into Lee Butler's hands. That would get the award for being in the right place at the right time. All he had to do was run. I'm going with the 10-yard touchdown pass to Chris Owusu. It was a little wide receiver screen. Great first move by Owusu, great blocking, and it swung the momentum back in Stanford's favor.

Best call: Hands down, the onside kick following Butler's interception return for a touchdown. In the end, it didn't end up hurting the Cardinal, who had two sacks on the next three plays. But you have to love the call by David Cutcliffe.

Some fun facts about tomorrow's Stanford/Duke matchup:

• Stanford moved up to No. 6 in the AP Poll this week, its best ranking this early in the season since 1970, when it reached No. 4 in the Sept. 14 poll.
• Stanford quarterback Andrew Luck is 21-5 all-time as a starter, currently the highest win percentage by a quarterback in school history.
• Stanford is on a nine-game winning streak, the second longest streak in FBS behind Auburn’s 16. The Cardinal have won their last four games by at least 28 points each.

• Duke vs. Top-10 Teams, Last 20 Games

  W-L	0-20
  PPG	15.3
  PPG Allowed	51.6
  Margin	-36.3

  Duke has lost 42 straight games against ranked opponents, last beating No. 13 Virginia in 1994. The Blue Devils last beat a top-10 team in 1989, when Steve Spurrier’s Duke squad knocked off No. 7 Clemson. Since then, they’ve lost 20 straight against top-10 opponents and the numbers haven’t been pretty (see chart).
• Duke lost at home to Richmond for the second time in three seasons. Now they host a top-10 Stanford team. It’s the second straight season that Duke is hosting a top-10 nonconference opponent. Last season, the Blue Devils lost 62-13 to top-ranked Alabama.
• The two teams haven’t met since 1972. They’ve split two all-time meetings.
• Stanford has outscored its last 14 opponents 328-93 in the first half.

PALO ALTO, Calif. -- Since this blog didn't come online until last Friday, and the ESPN.com bloggers post their predictions on Thursdays, you're going to have to take me at my word that I picked Stanford over San Jose State.

Overall: 1-0

Prediction: Stanford.

Why they'll win: I'm going with Stanford, and not because they are 22-point favorites. And it's not because of who they have starting. It's because of who they can put in to replace those starters. The Cardinal are deep -- possibly as deep as they have ever been in the history of the program -- and they're deep on both sides of the ball. A lot of different players tallied vital game experience against San Jose State, and coach David Shaw said he's confident that as many as eight defensive backs can be substituted liberally.

Experience counts: Make no mistake, heat is going to be a factor. Durham, N.C., does not offer the same, cool, breezy afternoons that Northern California does. It was an issue in 2009 when Stanford traveled to Winston-Salem and lost to Wake Forest on a last-minute touchdown. Shaw, then the offensive coordinator, pointed to that game two years ago as an example of how a lack of depth hurt the Cardinal -- noting his team didn't have the same "juice" in the second half that they did in the first. But the Cardinal are deep enough this time around that when fatigue does set in, fresh players with legitimate game experience will be prepared and can spell the starters. Like they did two years ago, the team leaves today to give them an extra day to hydrate and adjust to the time difference.

Difference-maker(s): Expecting a big game from the offensive line. They weren't too pleased with their performance last week. Shaw said there will not be any changes to the lineup, so they have had another week to work together. They are anxious to show people they can be one of the nation's best units.

Out on a limb: I like running back Anthony Wilkerson to put together some good numbers this week. Stepfan Taylor will get the bulk of the work, per usual. But Wilkerson should see plenty of chances once the heat sets in (or if the score gets out of hand). If the line play makes a big jump between weeks 1 and 2, logic and a hunch say Wilkerson (8 carries, 15 yards last week) will do the same.

The ESPN.com weekly Top 25 preview is out.

Check out the preview for Stanford at Duke, which will be shown on ESPNU.

With the Cardinal on media blackout Sundays and Mondays, pickings are a little slim. A lot of the Tuesday chatter is focusing on the Heisman race.

• Jon Wilner of the San Jose Mercury News gives his report card on how Stanford did against San Jose State.
• ESPN Insider Ryan McCrystal says Baylor's Robert Griffin III, not Andrew Luck, is the new Heisman front-runner.
• A similar take from Cory McCartney of SI.com.
• The Blue Devils -- Stanford's next opponent -- are doing their best to put the loss to Richmond behind them, writes Steve Wiseman of the Herald-Sun.

David Cutcliffe knows quarterbacks.

Duke's head coach mentored both the Manning boys, Peyton at Tennessee and Eli at Ole Miss, and said Stanford quarterback Andrew Luck is cut from the same cloth.

"He's a little different than the Mannings, but he's got all of those tools, being you start with how you play the game," Cutcliffe said. "And it's not just the physical gifts. He plays the game really well to avoid sacks, pocket movement, awareness of the game, throwing the ball away when you need to and minimizing errors. He does that as well as any I have seen."

Stanford heads to Duke Saturday coming off a 57-3 win over San Jose State. Duke, meanwhile, is trying to pick up the pieces after dropping its opener to Richmond, 23-21. It's the third time in six years Duke has lost to the FCS school. It's also the second straight year the Blue Devils will be hosting a Top-10, nonconference team. Last year they fell to No. 1 Alabama 62-13.

Despite the loss, Cutcliffe said his team had a spirited practice on Sunday and the players took Monday off.

"We're going to prepare and prepare well," Cutcliffe said Monday night. "Unfortunately, we're dealing with a lot of adversity in that regard, but we've never done a poor job preparing. I think we let Alabama beat us twice last year. But we're not going to let that happen again.

"We're already out of the tall growth and have the wind at our backs again and we're going to practice in the morning and practice well."

Naturally, Luck is a major cause for concern. Not just for what he can do with his arm, but also his feet.

"He's certainly a physical specimen," Cutcliffe said. "He's a good, physical runner. I've talked to some people who have not only coached against him, but played against him, and they said when you hit him he's like a rock. He's just a physical guy and that's one of the reasons why he's so difficult to sack.

"As everyone knows, he would have been the first player taken last year. I'm certain he's headed toward that path again."