The CardBoard
Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! (/thread-17962.html)


Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - OutsiderFan - 08-22-2019

One of the primary factors I use to determine roster quality, probably about 50%, is offers to players by other programs. Then 25% is high school highlights. The rest a combination of seeing the players play in practices or games, and comments from coaches, teammates or insiders.

I'd like to focus here on offers by other programs to Stanford defensive players. Specifically, I want everyone to see the best offers Stanford's projected top defensive players received out of high school. Here we go:

Defensive Line
Jovann Swann: Boston College, Michigan State, Missouri, Mississippi State, Kentucky
Michael Williams: Texas, Miami, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio State, Penn State, Washington
Dalyn Wade-Perry: Alabama, Florida State, Miami, Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio State
Thomas Schaffer: Kentucky, Michigan State, Oregon, Wisconsin
Ryan Johnson: Alabama, Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Michigan, Oklahoma
Thomas Booker: Clemson, Georgia, LSU, Notre Dame, Ohio State
Bo Peek: Penn State, Ole Miss, Nebraska, Boston College
Josh Pakola: Georgia, Florida, Notre Dame, USC, Washington

Inside Linebackers
Curtis Robinson: Georgia, Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio State, USC
Andrew Pryts (granted he moved from S to LB): Alabama, Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State 
Jacob Mangum-Farrar: Northwestern, Oklahoma, Ole Miss, Utah
Ricky Miezan: Michigan State, Syracuse, Virginia, Wisconsin (guessing would be more better offers if he wasn't thought to be LAX player)
Tristan Sinclair: Nebraska, Notre Dame, Texas A&M, USC, Utah

Outside Linebackers
Casey Toohill: Boston College, Utah, Washington
Jordan Fox: Georgia, Miami, Nebraska, Virginia Tech, Wisconsin
Gabe Reid: Arizona, Utah, Washington
Andres Fox: Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Georgia, LSU, Notre Dame
Tobe Umerah: Alabama, Auburn, Notre Dame, Penn State, Wisconsin
Stephen Herron Jr.: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Ohio State

Defensive Backs
Malik Antoine: Cal, Northwestern, Oklahoma State, TCU, Vanderbilt
Paulson Adebo: Georgia, LSU, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Oregon
Obi Eboh: Cal, Missisippi State, Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio State
Treyjohn Butler: ASU, Cal, Northwestern, Washington
Kendall Williamson: Auburn, Michigan State, Mississippi State, UNC
Ethan Bonner: Northwestern, Washignton State
Donjae Logan: Washington State 
Stuart Head: Alabama, Clemson, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Wisconsin
Jonathan McGill: Cal, Boston College, Northwestern, Oklahoma State
Kyu-Byu Kelly: Cal, Nebraska, Oregon, UCLA
Zarhan Manley: ASU, Cal, Missouri, Vanderbilt 
Salim Turner-Muhammad: Boston College, Georgia, Michigan, Notre Dame, Wisconsin
Nicholas Toomer: Georgia Tech, Northwestern, Pitt, Vanderbilt, Virginia
Noah Williams: walk-on
JJ Parsons: walk-on

Not to put too fine a point on it, but it kind of bothers me how little Stanford fans expect from the Stanford Football team. I can go through the Offense and find similar (impressive) offers. I will fully acknowledge some weakness in terms of offers among the defensive backs, but overall, Stanford has an exceptionally talented roster. The expectations should be much higher than I perceive them to be as a result.

Basically, my conclusion is any coaching staff that can't win 8+ games with this roster is underachieving. In particular, the expectations, and therefore pressure to perform should be turned up much higher on Lance Anderson in particular. My takeaway is the sentiment around here is "well, we aren't that talented on Defense, so how can we really be that good?" This is rubbish. The talent on Defense is plenty good enough to field a very sound unit. I guarantee you Stanford has more talent than Northwestern and UCF, based on offers. Only Notre Dame, USC, Oregon, and Washington are teams on the schedule that have roster talent on par or better than Stanford.

Moreover, this team has OT Walker Little, TE Colby Parkinson, and CB Paulson Adebo, as pre-season ALL-AMERICANS, the #1 returning Pac-12 QB in terms of QBR in KJ Costello. Plus, and the most effective defensive player in the country in Jovan Swann.  Come on people, let's raise the expectations and excitement level for your Stanford Football team, and especially that DEFENSE!

RE: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - BobK - 08-22-2019

Wow who turned you on today ? Love it. Now of course you know that several schools like Alabama but not Clemson offer hundreds. Still love your post.

Remember there are hundreds of posters who are optimistic but don’t post

Now beat Northwestern

RE: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - SamuelMcF - 08-22-2019

This is great. Appreciate the sanguine outlook. I totally agree that there's a lot of upside for our defense. And focus on how YOUNG it is! EVERY SINGLE STARTER BUT ONE HAS ELIGIBILITY LEFT. (This is also part of what makes people nervous about it.) Crazy that we could theoretically have 9 defensive starters returning in 2020, assuming Adebo goes pro.

In general the defensive pipelines at each position are looking solid too. That's a brobdingnagian part of success IMO - need to make sure the cupboard continues to be stocked everywhere. We've seen what happens when there's little to no depth at a given position. That's why I'm praying for 3 DL this class - need to keep eyes forward a couple years to avoid those same pitfalls.

RE: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - qwerty49 - 08-22-2019

(08-22-2019, 11:05 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:   I will fully acknowledge some weakness in terms of offers among the defensive backs, but overall, Stanford has an exceptionally talented roster. The expectations should be much higher than I perceive them to be as a result.

One of the best posts you've ever written, very nice.  Yes, there seems to be a subtle difference in the offer list re DBs, and of course this position has historically been one of the hardest to fill for us (DT arguably being the other).  But I think it also speaks volumes about how Akina is able to produce good secondaries every year, even with a noticeable talent dip from other positions.  Like Randy Hart, Akina made a difference to his position group from Day One.

RE: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - d4cohn - 08-22-2019

Great post Outsider. I also find the pessimism about this season to be a bit perplexing. 

We lose a bit in offensive skill players to the league (JJAW, Kaden, Bryce etc.), but have young talent particularly at WR that might be ready to emerge. The OL has talent, but also some question marks both among the returners, and how heavily the coaching staff will lean on a talented true frosh class.

On defense, as you point out, I fully expect this year to be the rebirth of the Stanford defense, first and foremost driven
by a rapidly improving and deeper DL.

And finally, the most significant piece of evidence that I come back to is Coach Shaw's record of success against an easier odd-year schedule. In every odd year, Coach Shaw has either gone to a BCS/NY6 bowl or won the North or both. Washington lost a ton in terms of personnel, and Oregon's schedule is very difficult and unfavorable.

I think we win the North this year, and with no Darnold potentially waiting for us, as well as the Pac-12 championship in our backyard, I like our chances for Coach Shaw to once again hoist the Pac-12 championship trophy in December.

RE: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - ADPinWDC - 08-22-2019

I EXPECT us to win every game, and land in Roses against Harbaugh.  
-- In 2017, we beat #9 WASH and #8 NDAM Back-to-back in PA.  We can beat higher ranked teams. 
And we USUALLY take down USuC when they are higher ranked.  Plus the Ducks. 
... the Committee will find a way to exclude the Pac12 (*yawn*) from the CFP in favor of a SECOND SEC team.
VS OREGON: While we are at it, we have a THREE-game win streak on Oregon, two of them up in Autzen ! 
and during 2009-2015 when they were ranked in the TOP TEN for those six contests, we BEAT THEM 3 of 6 times ! QUACK !
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10157631471362509&set=p.10157631471362509&type=3&theater

Why are the Expectations not HIGHER... HUH?  [Piling on... ]

vs OREG: 6W - 4L, 2009-2018
STAN 51-42, OREG #7
@OREG #4, 52-31
OREG #6, 53-30
STAN, 17-14*, @OREG #1
STAN 26-20, OREG #2
@OREG #5, 45-16
OREG #NR, 38-36
STAN, 52-27, @OREG #NR
STAN 49-7, OREG #NR
STAN, 38-31* @OREG #20

RE: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - 81alum - 08-22-2019

Why are expectations not higher?  For those of us who suffered for decades, the answer is simple:  we cannot be disappointed if we start out with low expectations, but we can be pleasantly surprised.

After years of poor to mediocre teams, it is a defense mechanism.  Even a decade of excellence hasn't entirely cured us.

RE: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - winflop - 08-22-2019

I really hope it's better than I think it will be.

RE: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - stupac2 - 08-23-2019

I think expectations are low for a couple reasons:

1) We disappointed last year, so now our baseline is low. This ignores that the team was a MASH unit last year.

2) The schedule is legitimately brutal. We could be an 11-win team against an average schedule, but because the schedule is so difficult we might only win 8 or so.

We'll see what happens, I'm optimistic but don't really expect to win the north.

RE: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - fullmetal - 08-23-2019

stupac listed both reasons that I hold to right now.  

I'm not ignoring last year's MASH unit status -- I'm also concerned that the lack of a proven trainer/rehab specialist last year and much of this offseason will not have brought everyone all the way back from injury.  If you don't rehab and heal correctly, your injuries linger, and your propensity for re-injury is higher.

I love the tone of OutsiderFan's post, I love the optimism.  But everyone knows that freshmen start Day 1 as zero-star recruits, and high school recruiting hype is not a great predictor of college performance outside of the blue-chippers--even then that's not a guarantee.  Stanford's conversion rate from 4/5-stars to contributors (or better) is pretty good because of the type of player Stanford recruits (character, motivation, etc.), but that still doesn't mean that HS recruiting hype means much.

I'm not expecting to lose every game.  I need to see what this OL brings to the table this season.  I'm not worried about the defense...in Coach Akina I trust (Coach Reynolds seems to be working out pretty darn well too).  But everyone who got dinged up last season needs to show that they're all the way back and ready to collect interest.

RE: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - Goose - 08-23-2019

(08-23-2019, 08:38 AM)stupac2 Wrote:  I think expectations are low for a couple reasons:

1) We disappointed last year, so now our baseline is low. This ignores that the team was a MASH unit last year.

2) The schedule is legitimately brutal. We could be an 11-win team against an average schedule, but because the schedule is so difficult we might only win 8 or so.

We'll see what happens, I'm optimistic but don't really expect to win the north.

I think you a correct about the low baseline. I also think that the MASH unit status of the OL last year creates a real problem estimating what we will see this year. One the one hand, we tend to see it as the same guys, so we don't really expect them to be any better. OTOH, they were all hurt. So, what does that say about how they will play when they aren't hurt? We don't really know at all. Are they all the way back or still suffering injury effects? Will they play at the level they were recruited, or some other level? We really know nothing at all. because their injury status may cancel out any data we gathered about them before they were injured. I think this fact alone creates so much uncertainty that few people have any confidence that the OL will be significantly better this year. However, they could be. That is the real conundrum.

RE: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - d4cohn - 08-23-2019

(08-23-2019, 08:38 AM)stupac2 Wrote:  I think expectations are low for a couple reasons:

1) We disappointed last year, so now our baseline is low. 

9 wins, including Kings of Cali (wins over SDSU, SC, LA and Cal), extending the longest
win streak in Big Game history to 9, a bowl game win (even if it wasn't the prettiest performance),
and extending our win streak over Oregon to 3 as ADP points out, with an all-time win for the ages
that will go down with SC 2011 and Big Game 1990 in terms of drama, is a disappointment?

Beating every major California rival and finishing with 9 wins will never be a disappointment in my estimation.
At worst, I would look at that with a neutral assessment.

RE: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - BostonCard - 08-23-2019

I think there is a lot of inexperience, particularly in the center of the field. Among the five ILB's who were on the team last year, two redshirted, one is a former walk-on, one is a converted safety and one is a converted outside linebacker.  I wonder how many total snaps at inside linebacker they have ever had.

BC

RE: Stanford's Defense is better than you think! - SamuelMcF - 08-23-2019

(08-23-2019, 01:58 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  I think there is a lot of inexperience, particularly in the center of the field. Among the five ILB's who were on the team last year, two redshirted, one is a former walk-on, one is a converted safety and one is a converted outside linebacker.  I wonder how many total snaps at inside linebacker they have ever had.

BC

Pryts played in 11 games (some meaningful snaps here and there at ILB; in particular I remember some bright spots against UCLA), and Beecher all 13 (mostly STs and some ILB snaps in garbage time).

You're right. Very very green on the whole. We're excited based purely on "potential" at this point. In general this seems like a higher-delta team than ones in years past.