[BostonCard]

Also, there is a question with small numbers for basketball compared to football, and a much steeper drop-off in talent generally.  A single top player can generally carry a basketball team as long as they have a decent supporting cast.  But you aren't going to get a superstar every year (or even most years) unless you are someone like Connecticut or an equivalent program, and, even under the best of circumstances, never at Stanford because of admissions.  I think under the best of circumstances we get a top target every other year or so.  If you have bad luck with admissions, or you have an admitable who for whatever reason decides to go elsewhere, you can easily have a four or year gap or longer between superstars.  And that's where we are.  The good news is that it we have done ok maintaining a stable of good supporting players; we just need to get an Ogwumike-caliber player and we will likely be back among the top-10 teams for three or so years.

Football doesn't depend on having a single top player; it is important to have quality across positions rather than a single superstar.  You can have a really good team without any top-50 recruits.  Moreover, rankings are less predictive in football than basketball, probably because the skills in the former take longer to fine tune and most players don't reach their peak physical maturity until well into college, whereas the skills and athleticism for top basketball players are usually evident earlier in their career.

BC

[BostonCard]

Also, there is a question with small numbers for basketball compared to football, and a much steeper drop-off in talent generally.  A single top player can generally carry a basketball team as long as they have a decent supporting cast.  But you aren't going to get a superstar every year (or even most years) unless you are someone like Connecticut or an equivalent program, and, even under the best of circumstances, never at Stanford because of admissions.  I think under the best of circumstances we get a top target every other year or so.  If you have bad luck with admissions, or you have an admitable who for whatever reason decides to go elsewhere, you can easily have a four or year gap or longer between superstars.  And that's where we are.  The good news is that it we have done ok maintaining a stable of good supporting players; we just need to get an Ogwumike-caliber player and we will likely be back among the top-10 teams for three or so years.

Football doesn't depend on having a single top player; it is important to have quality across positions rather than a single superstar.  You can have a really good team without any top-50 recruits.  Moreover, rankings are less predictive in football than basketball, probably because the skills in the former take longer to fine tune and most players don't reach their peak physical maturity until well into college, whereas the skills and athleticism for top basketball players are usually evident earlier in their career.

BC