01-15-2013, 08:25 PM
Have to agree with DC. This is a good class, but not elite on the basis of the recruiting sites' ratings. A small class should be high in quality since you are theoretically taking the best 15 players you can get. So to compare this year's class (11 commits so far) with last year's class, you would need to compare the commits so far (3.2 stars according to Scout) to the 11 highest ranked recruits of last year's class (4.2 stars).
What's hard to to know for sure is whether this was the best Stanford could do. It sounds like there weren't just as many elite players that could meet Stanford's admissions standards this year. On the other hand there were a few lost to $C that may have been motivated by $C's gaudy pre-season hype. Changing a person's mind is one of the hardest things to do in life. (Texas must have really f'd up to lose Durham Smythe). What Yvonne pointed out to start this thread is very insightful. Perhaps this is just a down year in the Pac-12 in terms of new talent and we're in relatively good shape. It is all relative.
I try to have a balanced view. Stanford seems to get more out of its players than the recruiting ratings would predict, likely a function of mental toughness, smarts, and good coaching. Still these recruiting ratings do seem to have some predictive value in the aggregate. 5 and 4 star rated players on average do have better college careers and are more likely to get drafted (there was an interesting article in the WSJ about this last year).
Overall, no complaints here. The smaller class is a function of many outstanding proven players staying, and there are a large number of players from last year's class that redshirted. And the future looks bright. It appears there are a large number of talented and smart players in next year's class and hopefully a strong performance this coming season should impress them. At the least this past season has proven that Stanford can win without Gerhart, Harbaugh, and Luck. And it appears that head coaching continuity will no longer be a problem on the Farm. Stanford is an elite program and will be so for the foreseeable future. There's a thread on Reddit today on who the elite programs for this decade will be and Stanford was as frequently mentioned as the usual suspects.
What's hard to to know for sure is whether this was the best Stanford could do. It sounds like there weren't just as many elite players that could meet Stanford's admissions standards this year. On the other hand there were a few lost to $C that may have been motivated by $C's gaudy pre-season hype. Changing a person's mind is one of the hardest things to do in life. (Texas must have really f'd up to lose Durham Smythe). What Yvonne pointed out to start this thread is very insightful. Perhaps this is just a down year in the Pac-12 in terms of new talent and we're in relatively good shape. It is all relative.
I try to have a balanced view. Stanford seems to get more out of its players than the recruiting ratings would predict, likely a function of mental toughness, smarts, and good coaching. Still these recruiting ratings do seem to have some predictive value in the aggregate. 5 and 4 star rated players on average do have better college careers and are more likely to get drafted (there was an interesting article in the WSJ about this last year).
Overall, no complaints here. The smaller class is a function of many outstanding proven players staying, and there are a large number of players from last year's class that redshirted. And the future looks bright. It appears there are a large number of talented and smart players in next year's class and hopefully a strong performance this coming season should impress them. At the least this past season has proven that Stanford can win without Gerhart, Harbaugh, and Luck. And it appears that head coaching continuity will no longer be a problem on the Farm. Stanford is an elite program and will be so for the foreseeable future. There's a thread on Reddit today on who the elite programs for this decade will be and Stanford was as frequently mentioned as the usual suspects.