[OutsiderFan]

There are some very talented players on the roster and coming into the program, but the bottom line is Stanford is getting squeezed from several angles given the changing realities of NCAA football. Are these dynamics going to send Stanford back to a place it can't realistically compete for conference championships? To what degree does Stanford need to evolve its approaches to assure it can compete for championships on the football field?


As I see it, there are several forces at work that weaken Stanford vs. its peers. Any one of them might not be debilitating, but when combined, they really hurt Stanford's ability to compete.

Players leaving the program early with eligibility remaining, not going to NFL
Every program has attrition, but given the limited pool of players, Stanford can't be losing guys early. A few years ago, there was an article about how Stanford was thriving because though the initial classes ere small, there was very little attrition and many 5th year Seniors. Over the last few years, more and more guys have been leaving early.  So what once was a strength is now a real weakness. Moreover, these guys weren't good enough for the NFL, so they didn't make Stanford great when playing, but provided good depth or "glue" to the 2-deep.

More early NFL departures
It used to be Stanford might lose guys as Juniors, but now more are leaving as RS Sophs, and some guys like Quentin Meeks leave early even if they aren't top draft prospects. 

Not taking early entries
One way to mitigate early departures is to get guys into the program earlier as well. This would not only give them a Spring Practice so they are more ready to play in the fall as Frosh, but just having more guys available will allow more full Spring Practices for the benefit of the whole team. Some will say they want kids to enjoy their Senior year, come in with all other Frosh, but with so many guys leaving early, what real difference does it make if guys come early if they are going to leave early too? I was a mid-year transfer at two different schools, and through it's admittedly a little awkward, it's not like it's some horrible experience that scars you for life.

LDS players
Sure, they have been valuable, but in addition to having to wait two years for them in most cases, they usually must redshirt to get into physical shape to play. Stanford doesn't have the luxury to wait a year for most of these guys to be ready to play.  The early departures also necessitate more guys playing sooner. Not saying Stanford should stop signing LDS players, just pointing this out as something working against Stanford in the current NCAA football landscape.

Not using all scholarships, like Stanford is on NCAA sanctions for reduction in initial counters
After the class of 2019 is all done, and all departures spoken for, Stanford will have what, 80 scholarship players? This is crazy, when you consider one of the NCAA's biggest punishments is reduction in scholarships. Stanford effectively punishes itself.  No other program does this.

Not using Spring Official visits
I may not understand this correctly, but by insisting on having a big January official visit weekend, after most of a class is settled, visits aren't being used as a tool to get recruits who might not have considered Stanford to do so. Based on what I gather, Stanford sees who pays for official visits on their own dime to determine who the most serious are. But what about those who really can't afford unofficial visits?  Why not use them to get guys coming to visit Stanford who wouldn't otherwise visit? And maybe January can be on own dime for more of the committed/signed?

Limited offers
While I get Shaw's position that he wants all offers to be "real" and actionable, such that if someone commits to Stanford, they have a spot (unless admissions says otherwise), who's side is he on?  The facts show without dispute that Stanford needs to sign more capable football players to avoid the chronic depth issues plaguing the program due to the above factors, so doesn't it stand to reason that it makes sense to widen the pool just a little bit by making more offers? If they get 23 commits out of 77 offers, why not offer 84 to get 25 commits? 

Devil's Advocate
To be clear, a class of 23 like 2019 is good for Stanford, so maybe Shaw and the football staff realize they have to bring in more guys annually from here on out given the above dynamics, and right now, the program is caught in a little transition to an understanding that classes now must be a bit bigger to account for the attrition taking a toll on depth.

It's just so alarming to see the OL, ILB, and S positions with so little depth, and so young at the same time. Stanford can barely have a Spring practice with so few bodies available.  It's not like this just all of a sudden happens. It's a product of the dynamics that lead to who is playing and who isn't over several years prior, so wanted to start a discussion about them.

[OutsiderFan]

There are some very talented players on the roster and coming into the program, but the bottom line is Stanford is getting squeezed from several angles given the changing realities of NCAA football. Are these dynamics going to send Stanford back to a place it can't realistically compete for conference championships? To what degree does Stanford need to evolve its approaches to assure it can compete for championships on the football field?


As I see it, there are several forces at work that weaken Stanford vs. its peers. Any one of them might not be debilitating, but when combined, they really hurt Stanford's ability to compete.

Players leaving the program early with eligibility remaining, not going to NFL
Every program has attrition, but given the limited pool of players, Stanford can't be losing guys early. A few years ago, there was an article about how Stanford was thriving because though the initial classes ere small, there was very little attrition and many 5th year Seniors. Over the last few years, more and more guys have been leaving early.  So what once was a strength is now a real weakness. Moreover, these guys weren't good enough for the NFL, so they didn't make Stanford great when playing, but provided good depth or "glue" to the 2-deep.

More early NFL departures
It used to be Stanford might lose guys as Juniors, but now more are leaving as RS Sophs, and some guys like Quentin Meeks leave early even if they aren't top draft prospects. 

Not taking early entries
One way to mitigate early departures is to get guys into the program earlier as well. This would not only give them a Spring Practice so they are more ready to play in the fall as Frosh, but just having more guys available will allow more full Spring Practices for the benefit of the whole team. Some will say they want kids to enjoy their Senior year, come in with all other Frosh, but with so many guys leaving early, what real difference does it make if guys come early if they are going to leave early too? I was a mid-year transfer at two different schools, and through it's admittedly a little awkward, it's not like it's some horrible experience that scars you for life.

LDS players
Sure, they have been valuable, but in addition to having to wait two years for them in most cases, they usually must redshirt to get into physical shape to play. Stanford doesn't have the luxury to wait a year for most of these guys to be ready to play.  The early departures also necessitate more guys playing sooner. Not saying Stanford should stop signing LDS players, just pointing this out as something working against Stanford in the current NCAA football landscape.

Not using all scholarships, like Stanford is on NCAA sanctions for reduction in initial counters
After the class of 2019 is all done, and all departures spoken for, Stanford will have what, 80 scholarship players? This is crazy, when you consider one of the NCAA's biggest punishments is reduction in scholarships. Stanford effectively punishes itself.  No other program does this.

Not using Spring Official visits
I may not understand this correctly, but by insisting on having a big January official visit weekend, after most of a class is settled, visits aren't being used as a tool to get recruits who might not have considered Stanford to do so. Based on what I gather, Stanford sees who pays for official visits on their own dime to determine who the most serious are. But what about those who really can't afford unofficial visits?  Why not use them to get guys coming to visit Stanford who wouldn't otherwise visit? And maybe January can be on own dime for more of the committed/signed?

Limited offers
While I get Shaw's position that he wants all offers to be "real" and actionable, such that if someone commits to Stanford, they have a spot (unless admissions says otherwise), who's side is he on?  The facts show without dispute that Stanford needs to sign more capable football players to avoid the chronic depth issues plaguing the program due to the above factors, so doesn't it stand to reason that it makes sense to widen the pool just a little bit by making more offers? If they get 23 commits out of 77 offers, why not offer 84 to get 25 commits? 

Devil's Advocate
To be clear, a class of 23 like 2019 is good for Stanford, so maybe Shaw and the football staff realize they have to bring in more guys annually from here on out given the above dynamics, and right now, the program is caught in a little transition to an understanding that classes now must be a bit bigger to account for the attrition taking a toll on depth.

It's just so alarming to see the OL, ILB, and S positions with so little depth, and so young at the same time. Stanford can barely have a Spring practice with so few bodies available.  It's not like this just all of a sudden happens. It's a product of the dynamics that lead to who is playing and who isn't over several years prior, so wanted to start a discussion about them.