[Goose]

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.

First, I hope you are right and both contribute a lot this year. But, I think you are looking through equally Cardinal-colored glasses.  Lots of guys come in as "can't miss" prospects and then, God forbid, miss. Others come in and do great, but it takes a bit of time. A very few hit it from day one. I just don't accept the concept that we are doomed to be an 8-4 (or worse) team if Little and Sarell are not big contributors.

Hall and Bright are just not even in the same conversation as Little and Sarell as athletes at the OT position

Right now, it is reasonable to say that Little and Sarell have the potential to be more athletic at the tackle position. Will they be better football players? We shall see. I hope so, but I am not going to count on it for 2017. They haven't played a down of college ball yet.

and Tucker is a Guard all day long on a contending team.

Well, somehow Tucker made it through a year at tackle on the 2015 team, which I would imagine could be classified as a "contending" team. Now, it certainly appeared he regressed in 2016, but all that proves is that it is real hard to predict what any given player will do, even highly touted ones.  Tucker was a four star recruit, not chopped liver.

but he isn't going to be starting over Little or Sarell at OT for Stanford ever, barring something unforeseen.

Something unforeseen, like, for example,  that he plays better than they do?  ;D Nobody thought Hogan would ever play either.

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.

I agree with you here. You can try to defend the run with fast, strong, smaller guys, but it is a lot better, especially in the 3 man line, if there is somebody they just can't move. It eats up the blocks and allows the faster, smaller guys to be effective. In this case, Wade-Perry is really our only choice, AFIK. The question is, is he strong enough to do it? We may not needs tons of quick, but as a "plug" at NT, he will need to be real strong. Conventional wisdom says Freshmen usually aren't. I hope he is.

[Goose]

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.

First, I hope you are right and both contribute a lot this year. But, I think you are looking through equally Cardinal-colored glasses.  Lots of guys come in as "can't miss" prospects and then, God forbid, miss. Others come in and do great, but it takes a bit of time. A very few hit it from day one. I just don't accept the concept that we are doomed to be an 8-4 (or worse) team if Little and Sarell are not big contributors.

Hall and Bright are just not even in the same conversation as Little and Sarell as athletes at the OT position

Right now, it is reasonable to say that Little and Sarell have the potential to be more athletic at the tackle position. Will they be better football players? We shall see. I hope so, but I am not going to count on it for 2017. They haven't played a down of college ball yet.

and Tucker is a Guard all day long on a contending team.

Well, somehow Tucker made it through a year at tackle on the 2015 team, which I would imagine could be classified as a "contending" team. Now, it certainly appeared he regressed in 2016, but all that proves is that it is real hard to predict what any given player will do, even highly touted ones.  Tucker was a four star recruit, not chopped liver.

but he isn't going to be starting over Little or Sarell at OT for Stanford ever, barring something unforeseen.

Something unforeseen, like, for example,  that he plays better than they do?  ;D Nobody thought Hogan would ever play either.

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.

I agree with you here. You can try to defend the run with fast, strong, smaller guys, but it is a lot better, especially in the 3 man line, if there is somebody they just can't move. It eats up the blocks and allows the faster, smaller guys to be effective. In this case, Wade-Perry is really our only choice, AFIK. The question is, is he strong enough to do it? We may not needs tons of quick, but as a "plug" at NT, he will need to be real strong. Conventional wisdom says Freshmen usually aren't. I hope he is.