Amongst the wannabe national champions (perennial top-25) Stanford has 14-0 intellectual talent and 9-5 physical talent. Our closest rival (ND) has 11-3 intellectual talent and 10-4 physical talent. As has been implied above, none of our competitors has 14-0 physical talent. The best (Alabama) is 12-2 at best.
Given that Alabama (or whichever team you think has the best physical talent) is probably no better than 7-7 vis a vis intellectual talent, Stanford should be able to compete against anybody, and has so over the past 5 years. However, when the chips are down (Fiesta Bowl, ND 2012, Utah/SC 2013, MSU 2014) our coaching staff doesn't seem to have a clue. I think they want to try to prove that we are more physical than we really are (relatively) and forget that we are more intellectual than any of our opponents.
Three yards and a cloud of dust is not what Stanford should be. Coach Shaw is a good one, but he is not Bill Walsh. With the talent we had in 2013, Walsh would have had us playing v. FSU, and we would have embarrassed them, IMVHO....
Given that Alabama (or whichever team you think has the best physical talent) is probably no better than 7-7 vis a vis intellectual talent, Stanford should be able to compete against anybody, and has so over the past 5 years. However, when the chips are down (Fiesta Bowl, ND 2012, Utah/SC 2013, MSU 2014) our coaching staff doesn't seem to have a clue. I think they want to try to prove that we are more physical than we really are (relatively) and forget that we are more intellectual than any of our opponents.
Three yards and a cloud of dust is not what Stanford should be. Coach Shaw is a good one, but he is not Bill Walsh. With the talent we had in 2013, Walsh would have had us playing v. FSU, and we would have embarrassed them, IMVHO....
All models are wrong; some models are useful......
George Box