[msqueri]

Msqueri, I admire your willingness to take on this task especially doing so before the first depth chart is posted. Have you been able to see anyone play during fall practice? Or is your assessment of the frosh based on what you saw from high school film and results?

I am curious at the omission of JFR. Don't you think he will get enough plays to qualify for the list?

I have not been to a practice. My assessment is as all-source as I can muster, based on past performance (always the most important indicator), reports on what's been happening at practice (one of the premium sites reports fairly well on the depth chart), public indications/interviews (there have been something like 30 interviews I have studied, which don't tend to reveal much but I look for clues), and other impressions (such as the high school film and results you mention). Again, past performance is always the best indicator. I have done quite a bit of study over the years to get a sense of what past performance tends to translate to at each position, as it does differ (e.g., the extent of linear improvement, what constitutes good performance at a given age, how to make sense of given positions, etc.). 

My impression is that JFR has been over-recruited and will have a less significant role this year than last year. He is in a similar boat to Mayberry in terms of being bad last year, apparently changing positions (though the inexcusable fact we don't update our official roster anymore obfuscates this), explicitly being viewed as a versatile option for multiple (but it seems in an emergency/not trusted/break glass kind of way), and having numerous teammates who are getting more buzz and being reported on as playing before him. I am confident he is not going into the season anywhere near the key starting group but also have doubts he will fend off guys like Ojarikre, Davis, and Sumlin at safety. In short, one of the judgment calls I made in this exercise is that like Mayberry JFR is receding.

---

Big screaming headline from this list is the prediction of Elijah Brown playing, possibly a lot (and looking good, relatively, of course). We shall see. I would not be surprised to see him against TCU.

Don't get the love for Collin Wright, and it's purely wishful thinking at this stage to place a frosh RB in the top ten. My hope is that the Clay Patterson hype from the coaches has some real substance behind it, and he ends up a top 10 player. 

Enjoyed the list overall.

Taylor has been a heavy exponent of using two QBs in recent years and this particular competition, with still no starter named among Daniels, Lamson, and Brown and Taylor having been pretty assiduous in talking about them as all having significantly improved (and otherwise posturing similar to last year), suggests we will likely see that again. Lamson's proven use as a running option, coupled with Taylor's track record in integrating that kind of wrinkle, creates pretty significant likelihood we see a big role for Lamson again. However, Taylor talks about Brown in a different way than he does the others and gives me the impression Taylor's mind's eye on the QB1 that will lead Stanford football to a turnaround is Brown. I think there is a fairly good likelihood Brown gets worked in. Ultimately, I thought the best prediction was that we'd have two 200+ snap QBs and I kind of agonized over which two to pick as there are myriad ways this could unfold and one could envision just about any permutation of these three. My notional forecast is something like Daniels playing very competently but the team struggling and Taylor using a 1-5 or 2-4 start as the opportunity to turn over the starting reins to Brown. But there are injury scenarios and others. As far as having both QBs pretty high, this is a predictive exercise that takes into account how QBs tend to grade and, frankly, how bad the rest of our team is. Last year Lamson ended up grading #6 (really quite effective in his running role, and grades are rate things) and Daniels was #8. I pretty much nailed the QB comparison last year and used similar process/logic this year, but thinking Brown (and not Lamson) would play significantly is a judgment call that I very easily could see going the other way. 

I think you are wrong about Wright. He was #2 last year and there is no reason to think he has taken a step back. He needs to do a better job getting his head around and playing balls (almost as many tackles for loss as passes defended last year) but he is clearly one of our top few best players. 

Don't think it's too wishful to think a true freshman RB will be one of our top 10 players. It's a tough call on which RB will be our highest graded as things are pretty wide open, but Taylor's enthusiasm in and commitment to the freshmen RBs was the single most obvious theme of camp. For what it's worth, the #9 player on our team last year had a 64.4 grade. 200+ snap RBs in the ACC almost always grade that well. 

I don't see the coaches hyping Patterson as much as enthusiastically answering questions directly about him, as they do with all players. I don't have a sense he is ahead of Franklin and Phillips per se, and the translation of Ivy League to ACC would make it extremely unlikely Patterson is one of our best players. I do have hopes for him though. 

Thanks for engaging on this!

[msqueri]

Msqueri, I admire your willingness to take on this task especially doing so before the first depth chart is posted. Have you been able to see anyone play during fall practice? Or is your assessment of the frosh based on what you saw from high school film and results?

I am curious at the omission of JFR. Don't you think he will get enough plays to qualify for the list?

I have not been to a practice. My assessment is as all-source as I can muster, based on past performance (always the most important indicator), reports on what's been happening at practice (one of the premium sites reports fairly well on the depth chart), public indications/interviews (there have been something like 30 interviews I have studied, which don't tend to reveal much but I look for clues), and other impressions (such as the high school film and results you mention). Again, past performance is always the best indicator. I have done quite a bit of study over the years to get a sense of what past performance tends to translate to at each position, as it does differ (e.g., the extent of linear improvement, what constitutes good performance at a given age, how to make sense of given positions, etc.). 

My impression is that JFR has been over-recruited and will have a less significant role this year than last year. He is in a similar boat to Mayberry in terms of being bad last year, apparently changing positions (though the inexcusable fact we don't update our official roster anymore obfuscates this), explicitly being viewed as a versatile option for multiple (but it seems in an emergency/not trusted/break glass kind of way), and having numerous teammates who are getting more buzz and being reported on as playing before him. I am confident he is not going into the season anywhere near the key starting group but also have doubts he will fend off guys like Ojarikre, Davis, and Sumlin at safety. In short, one of the judgment calls I made in this exercise is that like Mayberry JFR is receding.

---

Big screaming headline from this list is the prediction of Elijah Brown playing, possibly a lot (and looking good, relatively, of course). We shall see. I would not be surprised to see him against TCU.

Don't get the love for Collin Wright, and it's purely wishful thinking at this stage to place a frosh RB in the top ten. My hope is that the Clay Patterson hype from the coaches has some real substance behind it, and he ends up a top 10 player. 

Enjoyed the list overall.

Taylor has been a heavy exponent of using two QBs in recent years and this particular competition, with still no starter named among Daniels, Lamson, and Brown and Taylor having been pretty assiduous in talking about them as all having significantly improved (and otherwise posturing similar to last year), suggests we will likely see that again. Lamson's proven use as a running option, coupled with Taylor's track record in integrating that kind of wrinkle, creates pretty significant likelihood we see a big role for Lamson again. However, Taylor talks about Brown in a different way than he does the others and gives me the impression Taylor's mind's eye on the QB1 that will lead Stanford football to a turnaround is Brown. I think there is a fairly good likelihood Brown gets worked in. Ultimately, I thought the best prediction was that we'd have two 200+ snap QBs and I kind of agonized over which two to pick as there are myriad ways this could unfold and one could envision just about any permutation of these three. My notional forecast is something like Daniels playing very competently but the team struggling and Taylor using a 1-5 or 2-4 start as the opportunity to turn over the starting reins to Brown. But there are injury scenarios and others. As far as having both QBs pretty high, this is a predictive exercise that takes into account how QBs tend to grade and, frankly, how bad the rest of our team is. Last year Lamson ended up grading #6 (really quite effective in his running role, and grades are rate things) and Daniels was #8. I pretty much nailed the QB comparison last year and used similar process/logic this year, but thinking Brown (and not Lamson) would play significantly is a judgment call that I very easily could see going the other way. 

I think you are wrong about Wright. He was #2 last year and there is no reason to think he has taken a step back. He needs to do a better job getting his head around and playing balls (almost as many tackles for loss as passes defended last year) but he is clearly one of our top few best players. 

Don't think it's too wishful to think a true freshman RB will be one of our top 10 players. It's a tough call on which RB will be our highest graded as things are pretty wide open, but Taylor's enthusiasm in and commitment to the freshmen RBs was the single most obvious theme of camp. For what it's worth, the #9 player on our team last year had a 64.4 grade. 200+ snap RBs in the ACC almost always grade that well. 

I don't see the coaches hyping Patterson as much as enthusiastically answering questions directly about him, as they do with all players. I don't have a sense he is ahead of Franklin and Phillips per se, and the translation of Ivy League to ACC would make it extremely unlikely Patterson is one of our best players. I do have hopes for him though. 

Thanks for engaging on this!