[OutsiderFan]

[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=17063.msg195647#msg195647 date=1500489082]
More so than any year in recent memory, this Stanford team needs meaningful contributions from True Frosh to legitimately contend for a championship, IMO.  If you look at the trenches, Stanford is outclassed by the better teams without guys like Little, Sarell, and Wade-Perry.  But I also think Wedington, St. Brown and maybe Parkinson, will need to play and make meaningful contributions, because they are all tremendously offensively skilled.  If these kids are ready to play, I will up my prediction for wins from 8 to 9 or 10.

Hey, given Foster Sarell plays for Stanford, shouldn't the board software recognize his name?

OF, you may be correct. However, it seems to me that you are saying that the guys we had last year didn't perform well enough, but that the new guys will. I am more of the belief that the guys from last year can/will perform better this year. In either case, it is a hope based really on no data. Fortunately, the two conditions are not mutually exclusive. However, I feel compelled to point out that the degree to which a player is skilled isn't really known until he plays. It is certainly true we will need to get "more" from several positions to win 10 games or better.
[/quote]

Let's cut to the chase here.  Little and Sarell are gigantic and powerful athletes.  They were the #1 and #2 OT recruits in the country according to most analysts.  Some observers watching Little at the Army game practices said he might be the best OT prospect they've ever seen at that point.  Sarell went into that game being #1.  Put away the cardinal-colored glasses.  Hall and Bright are just not even in the same conversation as Little and Sarell as athletes at the OT position, and Tucker is a Guard all day long on a contending team.  I thought Hamilton might step up, but apparently he did not in the Spring session.  Doesn't mean he won't over time, but he isn't going to be starting over Little or Sarell at OT for Stanford ever, barring something unforeseen.

Wade-Perry isn't nearly the slam dunk athletic monster Little and Sarell are, but he is a big body who is a very good athlete for his size, a size Stanford totally lacks without him at NT.  People want to pin the mediocre run defense in 2016 on the ILBs, but I firmly believe its more a function of not having a big body to anchor the middle.  Sans such a body, it's hard to imagine the 2017 rush defense improving over 2016.  You can't be a championship contender allowing over 4YPC unless you have a prolific offense.  Does anyone see a prolific offense?

[OutsiderFan]

[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=17063.msg195647#msg195647 date=1500489082]
More so than any year in recent memory, this Stanford team needs meaningful contributions from True Frosh to legitimately contend for a championship, IMO.  If you look at the trenches, Stanford is outclassed by the better teams without guys like Little, Sarell, and Wade-Perry.  But I also think Wedington, St. Brown and maybe Parkinson, will need to play and make meaningful contributions, because they are all tremendously offensively skilled.  If these kids are ready to play, I will up my prediction for wins from 8 to 9 or 10.

Hey, given Foster Sarell plays for Stanford, shouldn't the board software recognize his name?

OF, you may be correct. However, it seems to me that you are saying that the guys we had last year didn't perform well enough, but that the new guys will. I am more of the belief that the guys from last year can/will perform better this year. In either case, it is a hope based really on no data. Fortunately, the two conditions are not mutually exclusive. However, I feel compelled to point out that the degree to which a player is skilled isn't really known until he plays. It is certainly true we will need to get "more" from several positions to win 10 games or better.
[/quote]

Let's cut to the chase here.  Little and Sarell are gigantic and powerful athletes.  They were the #1 and #2 OT recruits in the country according to most analysts.  Some observers watching Little at the Army game practices said he might be the best OT prospect they've ever seen at that point.  Sarell went into that game being #1.  Put away the cardinal-colored glasses.  Hall and Bright are just not even in the same conversation as Little and Sarell as athletes at the OT position, and Tucker is a Guard all day long on a contending team.  I thought Hamilton might step up, but apparently he did not in the Spring session.  Doesn't mean he won't over time, but he isn't going to be starting over Little or Sarell at OT for Stanford ever, barring something unforeseen.

Wade-Perry isn't nearly the slam dunk athletic monster Little and Sarell are, but he is a big body who is a very good athlete for his size, a size Stanford totally lacks without him at NT.  People want to pin the mediocre run defense in 2016 on the ILBs, but I firmly believe its more a function of not having a big body to anchor the middle.  Sans such a body, it's hard to imagine the 2017 rush defense improving over 2016.  You can't be a championship contender allowing over 4YPC unless you have a prolific offense.  Does anyone see a prolific offense?