[Cbocgo1]

I registered to get your input

As Hall has retained his starting position, our OL prospects are dim - unless he has had an incredible offseason improving his skills / foot speed, he flat out cannot pass block

I don't get it

Thanks for your comments

[Cbocgo1]

I registered to get your input

As Hall has retained his starting position, our OL prospects are dim - unless he has had an incredible offseason improving his skills / foot speed, he flat out cannot pass block

I don't get it

Thanks for your comments

[donkey687]

I registered to get your input

As Hall has retained his starting position, our OL prospects are dim - unless he has had an incredible offseason improving his skills / foot speed, he flat out cannot pass block

I don't get it

Thanks for your comments

On the flip side, we have a two year starter who was the starting right tackle all season on the #3 team in the country in 2015 (Casey Tucker) who is battling to win a starting position this year as a senior.  We must be pretty good if a guy who started the last two years may not start today.

[donkey687]

I registered to get your input

As Hall has retained his starting position, our OL prospects are dim - unless he has had an incredible offseason improving his skills / foot speed, he flat out cannot pass block

I don't get it

Thanks for your comments

On the flip side, we have a two year starter who was the starting right tackle all season on the #3 team in the country in 2015 (Casey Tucker) who is battling to win a starting position this year as a senior.  We must be pretty good if a guy who started the last two years may not start today.

[BobK]

All I can say is Hall is now healthy.  Which for an athlete makes s brobdingnagian difference. 😀

[BobK]

All I can say is Hall is now healthy.  Which for an athlete makes s brobdingnagian difference. 😀

[Hulk01]

My expertise?

Okay, first thoughts:
Hall has only a current and tentative hold on the right tackle spot. Last year, he often looked horrible trying to deal with outside pass rushes from the left side, and compounded that with several false starts and holding penaltie.  But at right tackle, often shaded by a tight end and pitted against a weaker pass rusher, Hall's pass blocking becomes slightly less of a concern.

Second, Hall's hold on the starting spot is tentative.  Devery Hamilton--whom Bloomgren has referred to as the prototypical left tackle, "long and with great feet"--reportedly is progressing nicely after a disappointing spring game.  (In Hamilton's defense, Mike Tyler's knack for rushing off that left side had made a lot of decent tackles look inept at times.) 

So David Bright and Hamilton could be the starting tackles for the USC game.

And one of our freshmen five star tackles, Foster Sarell and Walker Little, could end up as a starter by midseason.  Little might be the better prepared because he spent all of last year's practices matched up against the nation's top-ranked defensive lineman, Marvin Wilson.

 

[Hulk01]

My expertise?

Okay, first thoughts:
Hall has only a current and tentative hold on the right tackle spot. Last year, he often looked horrible trying to deal with outside pass rushes from the left side, and compounded that with several false starts and holding penaltie.  But at right tackle, often shaded by a tight end and pitted against a weaker pass rusher, Hall's pass blocking becomes slightly less of a concern.

Second, Hall's hold on the starting spot is tentative.  Devery Hamilton--whom Bloomgren has referred to as the prototypical left tackle, "long and with great feet"--reportedly is progressing nicely after a disappointing spring game.  (In Hamilton's defense, Mike Tyler's knack for rushing off that left side had made a lot of decent tackles look inept at times.) 

So David Bright and Hamilton could be the starting tackles for the USC game.

And one of our freshmen five star tackles, Foster Sarell and Walker Little, could end up as a starter by midseason.  Little might be the better prepared because he spent all of last year's practices matched up against the nation's top-ranked defensive lineman, Marvin Wilson.

 

[Hulk01]

Hall looked better in this year's spring game. 

[Hulk01]

Hall looked better in this year's spring game. 

[OutsiderFan]

Hall played RT exclusively in the Spring game, so the Hall at LT thing is not a thing anymore, which is a good thing.

Bright and Hamilton rotated at LT.  Though Hamilton did have a few pass protections issues, it's not like he was consistently bad.  He was beaten a time or two early on pass rushes, but seemed to hold his own thereafter, so I'm not really buying that Hamilton really struggled in the Spring Game.

Hamilton has a more prototypical body than Bright, but Bright actually was way better than I thought he would or even could be at LT.  Still, Little seems like the prototype, so there is no ruling him out at LT.  My question is what happens at RT if Little does take over that spot?  Does Bright or Hamilton move to RT?  Can't imagine Hall holding on to the RT spot in too many scenarios, to be honest.

[OutsiderFan]

Hall played RT exclusively in the Spring game, so the Hall at LT thing is not a thing anymore, which is a good thing.

Bright and Hamilton rotated at LT.  Though Hamilton did have a few pass protections issues, it's not like he was consistently bad.  He was beaten a time or two early on pass rushes, but seemed to hold his own thereafter, so I'm not really buying that Hamilton really struggled in the Spring Game.

Hamilton has a more prototypical body than Bright, but Bright actually was way better than I thought he would or even could be at LT.  Still, Little seems like the prototype, so there is no ruling him out at LT.  My question is what happens at RT if Little does take over that spot?  Does Bright or Hamilton move to RT?  Can't imagine Hall holding on to the RT spot in too many scenarios, to be honest.

[CTcard]

As Hall has retained his starting position, our OL prospects are dim

Broadly speaking, focusing on any one player winning a starting position as a sign of doom is ... not reliable. Of course the inverse is true as well, thinking any one particular player winning a starting position as a sign all is set is unreliable as well.

More specifically, sure Hall struggled badly at times last year, but it is not exactly rare to see a player improve (see several other responses) and last year the overall woes of the OL were spread beyond Hall.

For example, while Herbig was certainly a revelation, I don't really see why conventional wisdom seems to be that the interior of our OL is fine and dandy whereas the tackles are a disaster.
The coaches clearly think that right now our best OL is Bright, and he is set to play at left tackle, apparently.
In the interior, we have one guard that is the only position along the OL that needs a replacement, and there is no clear heir-apparent - no guy that the coaches have been raving about in semi-private.
At center, we saw far too much of this last year:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVr43oMhfTI#t=16m20s
There's also the somewhat troubling comment that Hank reported from Shaw that Herbig, Hall, and Bright seemed well-positioned as starters but the other positions were up for grabs; thus implying uncertainty at two of the three interior positions. [Though Hank seems to think skipping Burkett was a mere oversight on Shaw's part. And now I see that John Reid now reports that Shaw says "We’re close to being set on the other four spots.[other than RG]" https://cardreider.wordpress.com/2017/08...australia/. So perhaps this particular little quibble has evaporated. ]

On the other hand, I heard this morning on "The First Team" (Sirius radio) that one of Greg McElroy or Tom Luginbill (didn't catch which), raised Stanford as his favorite OL in the country for this year. So, we got that going for us.

------
For me, it's impossible to have an opinion on our prospects without actually seeing this year's group play.

I am heartened by the fact that experience, and experience together as a group, is more important for the OL than any other position group - and we have 4/5 OL returning and 6 guys with starting experience. It's been over a decade since we have had a majority of our OL back and not put together a good group.

I am worried by the fact that quite a bit of individual improvement is needed at several spots. And by the fact that even though they were improving towards the end of last season, Rice and UNC both recorded 3 sacks.

[CTcard]

As Hall has retained his starting position, our OL prospects are dim

Broadly speaking, focusing on any one player winning a starting position as a sign of doom is ... not reliable. Of course the inverse is true as well, thinking any one particular player winning a starting position as a sign all is set is unreliable as well.

More specifically, sure Hall struggled badly at times last year, but it is not exactly rare to see a player improve (see several other responses) and last year the overall woes of the OL were spread beyond Hall.

For example, while Herbig was certainly a revelation, I don't really see why conventional wisdom seems to be that the interior of our OL is fine and dandy whereas the tackles are a disaster.
The coaches clearly think that right now our best OL is Bright, and he is set to play at left tackle, apparently.
In the interior, we have one guard that is the only position along the OL that needs a replacement, and there is no clear heir-apparent - no guy that the coaches have been raving about in semi-private.
At center, we saw far too much of this last year:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVr43oMhfTI#t=16m20s
There's also the somewhat troubling comment that Hank reported from Shaw that Herbig, Hall, and Bright seemed well-positioned as starters but the other positions were up for grabs; thus implying uncertainty at two of the three interior positions. [Though Hank seems to think skipping Burkett was a mere oversight on Shaw's part. And now I see that John Reid now reports that Shaw says "We’re close to being set on the other four spots.[other than RG]" https://cardreider.wordpress.com/2017/08...australia/. So perhaps this particular little quibble has evaporated. ]

On the other hand, I heard this morning on "The First Team" (Sirius radio) that one of Greg McElroy or Tom Luginbill (didn't catch which), raised Stanford as his favorite OL in the country for this year. So, we got that going for us.

------
For me, it's impossible to have an opinion on our prospects without actually seeing this year's group play.

I am heartened by the fact that experience, and experience together as a group, is more important for the OL than any other position group - and we have 4/5 OL returning and 6 guys with starting experience. It's been over a decade since we have had a majority of our OL back and not put together a good group.

I am worried by the fact that quite a bit of individual improvement is needed at several spots. And by the fact that even though they were improving towards the end of last season, Rice and UNC both recorded 3 sacks.

[CTcard]

Bright and Hamilton rotated at LT.

Just trying to check what you meant.

As far as I can tell, Bright played LT with the first team and Hamilton played LT with the second team.

Is that what you meant by "rotated" - or were there any series I missed where Hamilton played with the first team?

[Fanaika and Tucker definitely rotated at RG with the first team, for example.]

Here's the broadcast of the spring game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGXOxn6iQHY

[CTcard]

Bright and Hamilton rotated at LT.

Just trying to check what you meant.

As far as I can tell, Bright played LT with the first team and Hamilton played LT with the second team.

Is that what you meant by "rotated" - or were there any series I missed where Hamilton played with the first team?

[Fanaika and Tucker definitely rotated at RG with the first team, for example.]

Here's the broadcast of the spring game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGXOxn6iQHY

[82lsju]

from the training camp thread

“We’re still competing at right guard,” Shaw said. “We’re close to being set on the other four spots. Dave Bright has done really well at left tackle. Nate Herbig continues to grow. He has a chance to be really good at left guard. He’s only a sophomore. Jesse Burkett is playing well at center. A.T. Hall is at right tackle. (Tackle) Devery Hamilton is coming on strong. We can use his versatility.”

True freshmen Foster Sarell and Walker Little, the top two offensive line recruits in the nation, will get their chances to compete, Shaw said.

“The freshmen are looking good,” Shaw said. “There is a lot to learn. We’re not making any decisions, but at the same time, we’ve only been here for over a week. Those guys are better than they were when they walked on campus. We’re going to continue to push those guys and see what they can do.”

https://cardreider.wordpress.com/2017/08...australia/

[82lsju]

from the training camp thread

“We’re still competing at right guard,” Shaw said. “We’re close to being set on the other four spots. Dave Bright has done really well at left tackle. Nate Herbig continues to grow. He has a chance to be really good at left guard. He’s only a sophomore. Jesse Burkett is playing well at center. A.T. Hall is at right tackle. (Tackle) Devery Hamilton is coming on strong. We can use his versatility.”

True freshmen Foster Sarell and Walker Little, the top two offensive line recruits in the nation, will get their chances to compete, Shaw said.

“The freshmen are looking good,” Shaw said. “There is a lot to learn. We’re not making any decisions, but at the same time, we’ve only been here for over a week. Those guys are better than they were when they walked on campus. We’re going to continue to push those guys and see what they can do.”

https://cardreider.wordpress.com/2017/08...australia/

[BostonCard]

There's also the somewhat troubling comment that Hank reported from Shaw that Herbig, Hall, and Bright seemed well-positioned as starters but the other positions were up for grabs; thus implying uncertainty at two of the three interior positions. [Though Hank seems to think skipping Burkett was a mere oversight on Shaw's part. And now I see that John Reid now reports that Shaw says "We’re close to being set on the other four spots.[other than RG]"

This is your usual reminder that on the list of a coach's job description, informing the fandom is pretty far down.  As I think you know (having reminded us on several occasions), we are not necessary the primary audience in a coach's discussion of starters and who is doing well or not.  Shaw may have been candid with Hank (especially given the setting), but also may have been strategic in what he was revealing.

BC

[BostonCard]

There's also the somewhat troubling comment that Hank reported from Shaw that Herbig, Hall, and Bright seemed well-positioned as starters but the other positions were up for grabs; thus implying uncertainty at two of the three interior positions. [Though Hank seems to think skipping Burkett was a mere oversight on Shaw's part. And now I see that John Reid now reports that Shaw says "We’re close to being set on the other four spots.[other than RG]"

This is your usual reminder that on the list of a coach's job description, informing the fandom is pretty far down.  As I think you know (having reminded us on several occasions), we are not necessary the primary audience in a coach's discussion of starters and who is doing well or not.  Shaw may have been candid with Hank (especially given the setting), but also may have been strategic in what he was revealing.

BC

[CTcard]

This is your usual reminder that on the list of a coach's job description, informing the fandom is pretty far down.  As I think you know (having reminded us on several occasions), we are not necessary the primary audience in a coach's discussion of starters and who is doing well or not.  Shaw may have been candid with Hank (especially given the setting), but also may have been strategic in what he was revealing.

True. However, if indeed Shaw were trying to send a message to Burkett by leaving him out of the list of players likely to start on the OL, then I would not take that as a positive sign.

On the other hand, I am now believing that the omission was most likely an unintentional slip.

[CTcard]

This is your usual reminder that on the list of a coach's job description, informing the fandom is pretty far down.  As I think you know (having reminded us on several occasions), we are not necessary the primary audience in a coach's discussion of starters and who is doing well or not.  Shaw may have been candid with Hank (especially given the setting), but also may have been strategic in what he was revealing.

True. However, if indeed Shaw were trying to send a message to Burkett by leaving him out of the list of players likely to start on the OL, then I would not take that as a positive sign.

On the other hand, I am now believing that the omission was most likely an unintentional slip.

[fullmetal]

If Shaw understands the average intellectual Stanford fan, then I think his words are honest and really just meant to temper our expectations while his expectations are set higher.  I think he's aiming to underpromise and overdeliver...and I really hope that he does.

[fullmetal]

If Shaw understands the average intellectual Stanford fan, then I think his words are honest and really just meant to temper our expectations while his expectations are set higher.  I think he's aiming to underpromise and overdeliver...and I really hope that he does.

[OutsiderFan]

From a CTCard post:

On the other hand, I heard this morning on "The First Team" (Sirius radio) that one of Greg McElroy or Tom Luginbill (didn't catch which), raised Stanford as his favorite OL in the country for this year. So, we got that going for us.

I'm beginning to think this belief in Stanford having his favorite OL in the country has to be predicated to some degree on the fact Little and Sarell are on the roster as arguably the top two, and at least 2/3 OT recruits in the class of 2017 recruits.

For one, Luginbill is ESPN's director of scouting or otherwise heavily involved in evaluating high school talent, and two, Stanford was the arguably the worst pass protection OL in the country in 2016.  I don't think these guys would be confident in Stanford's OL without an assumption that more talented players would be available in 2017 than 2016.  But maybe they buy Bright at LT because Shaw has expressed so much confidence in him, and that Hall will be better at RT.  Who the hell knows.  It just seems more likely than not that a new talent infusion is the predicate on which this belief in a Stanford's 2017 OL is based.

[OutsiderFan]

From a CTCard post:

On the other hand, I heard this morning on "The First Team" (Sirius radio) that one of Greg McElroy or Tom Luginbill (didn't catch which), raised Stanford as his favorite OL in the country for this year. So, we got that going for us.

I'm beginning to think this belief in Stanford having his favorite OL in the country has to be predicated to some degree on the fact Little and Sarell are on the roster as arguably the top two, and at least 2/3 OT recruits in the class of 2017 recruits.

For one, Luginbill is ESPN's director of scouting or otherwise heavily involved in evaluating high school talent, and two, Stanford was the arguably the worst pass protection OL in the country in 2016.  I don't think these guys would be confident in Stanford's OL without an assumption that more talented players would be available in 2017 than 2016.  But maybe they buy Bright at LT because Shaw has expressed so much confidence in him, and that Hall will be better at RT.  Who the hell knows.  It just seems more likely than not that a new talent infusion is the predicate on which this belief in a Stanford's 2017 OL is based.

[CTcard]

From a CTCard post:

On the other hand, I heard this morning on "The First Team" (Sirius radio) that one of Greg McElroy or Tom Luginbill (didn't catch which), raised Stanford as his favorite OL in the country for this year. So, we got that going for us.

I'm beginning to think this belief in Stanford having his favorite OL in the country has to be predicated to some degree on the fact Little and Sarell are on the roster as arguably the top two, and at least 2/3 OT recruits in the class of 2017 recruits.

From listening, I think this was based upon,
1. Stanford having a generic reputation for a good OL,
2. the most recent recruiting class, and
3. not paying all that much attention.

[CTcard]

From a CTCard post:

On the other hand, I heard this morning on "The First Team" (Sirius radio) that one of Greg McElroy or Tom Luginbill (didn't catch which), raised Stanford as his favorite OL in the country for this year. So, we got that going for us.

I'm beginning to think this belief in Stanford having his favorite OL in the country has to be predicated to some degree on the fact Little and Sarell are on the roster as arguably the top two, and at least 2/3 OT recruits in the class of 2017 recruits.

From listening, I think this was based upon,
1. Stanford having a generic reputation for a good OL,
2. the most recent recruiting class, and
3. not paying all that much attention.

[Hulk01]

Luginbill closely follows recruiting.  Here's what he sees as Stanford's OL backups.

T Hamilton, four star
T Little, five star
T Sarell, five star
G Wilson, four star
G Fanaika, four star
G  Yarbrough, four star (good chance Luginbill hasn't yet heard about Yarbrough's retirement.

He sees that he must think we quite a two-deep.

[Hulk01]

Luginbill closely follows recruiting.  Here's what he sees as Stanford's OL backups.

T Hamilton, four star
T Little, five star
T Sarell, five star
G Wilson, four star
G Fanaika, four star
G  Yarbrough, four star (good chance Luginbill hasn't yet heard about Yarbrough's retirement.

He sees that he must think we quite a two-deep.

[CTcard]

Luginbill closely follows recruiting.  Here's what he see on Stanford's two-deep at OL:

T Hamilton, four star
T Little, five star
T  Sarell, five star
G Wilson, four star
G  Fanaika, four star 
G  Yarbrough, four star (good chance Luginbill hasn't yet heard about Yarbrough's retirement.

That probably looks like a helluva two-deep to him.

Of course there is a reasonable chance that not one of those guys will start.

[CTcard]

Luginbill closely follows recruiting.  Here's what he see on Stanford's two-deep at OL:

T Hamilton, four star
T Little, five star
T  Sarell, five star
G Wilson, four star
G  Fanaika, four star 
G  Yarbrough, four star (good chance Luginbill hasn't yet heard about Yarbrough's retirement.

That probably looks like a helluva two-deep to him.

Of course there is a reasonable chance that not one of those guys will start.

[JohnR34231]

If Shaw understands the average intellectual Stanford fan, then I think his words are honest and really just meant to temper our expectations while his expectations are set higher.  I think he's aiming to underpromise and overdeliver...and I really hope that he does.

I think that's the goal of many (if not most) football coaches.
My father was an old college coach and one of his expressions about the fans was "Keep 'em sullen, but not mutinous."

[JohnR34231]

If Shaw understands the average intellectual Stanford fan, then I think his words are honest and really just meant to temper our expectations while his expectations are set higher.  I think he's aiming to underpromise and overdeliver...and I really hope that he does.

I think that's the goal of many (if not most) football coaches.
My father was an old college coach and one of his expressions about the fans was "Keep 'em sullen, but not mutinous."

[ADPATERSON]

Most coaches would give major bucks to be sorting thru the OLine "problems" with the options Shaw has right now. 
Other coaches today do not have the luxury of waiting on Little or Sarrel to develop a year -- they would play now. 
Elway or Stenstrom (the other record setters with Luck and Hogan) NEVER had OL talent like this -- how did they do it?
And their Defenses were nothing close to what we have (which translates to field position, number of plays) 

[ADPATERSON]

Most coaches would give major bucks to be sorting thru the OLine "problems" with the options Shaw has right now. 
Other coaches today do not have the luxury of waiting on Little or Sarrel to develop a year -- they would play now. 
Elway or Stenstrom (the other record setters with Luck and Hogan) NEVER had OL talent like this -- how did they do it?
And their Defenses were nothing close to what we have (which translates to field position, number of plays) 

[JohnR34231]

Most coaches would give major bucks to be sorting through the OLine "problems" with the options Shaw has right now. 
Other coaches today do not have the luxury of waiting on Little or Sarrel to develop a year -- they would play now. 
Elway or Stenstrom (the other record setters with Luck and Hogan) NEVER had OL talent like this -- how did they do it?
And their Defenses were nothing close to what we have (which translates to field position, number of plays)

Probably one of the reasons neither Elway nor Stenstrom ever led us to the Rose Bowl (or in Elway's case, a bowl game, period).

[JohnR34231]

Most coaches would give major bucks to be sorting through the OLine "problems" with the options Shaw has right now. 
Other coaches today do not have the luxury of waiting on Little or Sarrel to develop a year -- they would play now. 
Elway or Stenstrom (the other record setters with Luck and Hogan) NEVER had OL talent like this -- how did they do it?
And their Defenses were nothing close to what we have (which translates to field position, number of plays)

Probably one of the reasons neither Elway nor Stenstrom ever led us to the Rose Bowl (or in Elway's case, a bowl game, period).

[winflop]

[quote author=Hulk01 link=topic=17147.msg197029#msg197029 date=1502559547]
Luginbill closely follows recruiting.  Here's what he see on Stanford's two-deep at OL:

T Hamilton, four star
T Little, five star
T  Sarell, five star
G Wilson, four star
G  Fanaika, four star 
G  Yarbrough, four star (good chance Luginbill hasn't yet heard about Yarbrough's retirement.

That probably looks like a helluva two-deep to him.

Of course there is a reasonable chance that not one of those guys will start.
[/quote]

Not if we run Heavy Jumbo on every play!

[winflop]

[quote author=Hulk01 link=topic=17147.msg197029#msg197029 date=1502559547]
Luginbill closely follows recruiting.  Here's what he see on Stanford's two-deep at OL:

T Hamilton, four star
T Little, five star
T  Sarell, five star
G Wilson, four star
G  Fanaika, four star 
G  Yarbrough, four star (good chance Luginbill hasn't yet heard about Yarbrough's retirement.

That probably looks like a helluva two-deep to him.

Of course there is a reasonable chance that not one of those guys will start.
[/quote]

Not if we run Heavy Jumbo on every play!