[82lsju]

we're #12

[b]12. Stanford
[/b]Troy Taylor arrives on the Farm after a successful stint as FCS Sacramento State's head coach (30-8), but the former Utah offensive coordinator inherits a roster with major concerns after last year's 3-9 mark. Running back E.J. Smith and tight end Benjamin Yurosek are two of the building blocks for Taylor's offense. However, the line must be rebuilt, and a quarterback battle will play out this offseason to replace Tanner McKee. Stanford's defense has been an issue in recent years and is likely to be a concern once again after surrendering 32.2 points a game in '22. Top corner Kyu Blu Kelly is off to the NFL.

https://athlonsports.com/college-footbal...early-2023

[82lsju]

we're #12

[b]12. Stanford
[/b]Troy Taylor arrives on the Farm after a successful stint as FCS Sacramento State's head coach (30-8), but the former Utah offensive coordinator inherits a roster with major concerns after last year's 3-9 mark. Running back E.J. Smith and tight end Benjamin Yurosek are two of the building blocks for Taylor's offense. However, the line must be rebuilt, and a quarterback battle will play out this offseason to replace Tanner McKee. Stanford's defense has been an issue in recent years and is likely to be a concern once again after surrendering 32.2 points a game in '22. Top corner Kyu Blu Kelly is off to the NFL.

https://athlonsports.com/college-footbal...early-2023

[BostonCard]

At least Taylor will not be burdened by high expectations.  I think that, objectively, that is correct, even as I try to find a reason to hope that Taylor can unlock something in the players that will cause us to exceed expectations.

3-9 (1-8) seems likely, but I am hopeful that we can somehow squeeze out another win or two.

BC

[BostonCard]

At least Taylor will not be burdened by high expectations.  I think that, objectively, that is correct, even as I try to find a reason to hope that Taylor can unlock something in the players that will cause us to exceed expectations.

3-9 (1-8) seems likely, but I am hopeful that we can somehow squeeze out another win or two.

BC

[Farm93]

I think perhaps 20 years ago, I could believe that a new coach could quickly change a program.   Opponents would have precious little film on the new scheme, and the team could get a few early wins that might lead to a 6 or 7 win season.

Now, for some programs, it is even easier to create a turnaround story.   A popular coach can get talent from JuCos and the transfer portal, perhaps with the help of NIL $$$, that wasn't possible before .  That coach might even hope that the old coach's recruits opt out to make more room for better players (see USC 2022).   That type of rapid turnaround pathway is just not available in the same way to a new Stanford football coach.

In any event, 12th place in 2023.

Maybe in 2024 Stanford will show improvement and finish in 10th place.  LOL.

[Farm93]

I think perhaps 20 years ago, I could believe that a new coach could quickly change a program.   Opponents would have precious little film on the new scheme, and the team could get a few early wins that might lead to a 6 or 7 win season.

Now, for some programs, it is even easier to create a turnaround story.   A popular coach can get talent from JuCos and the transfer portal, perhaps with the help of NIL $$$, that wasn't possible before .  That coach might even hope that the old coach's recruits opt out to make more room for better players (see USC 2022).   That type of rapid turnaround pathway is just not available in the same way to a new Stanford football coach.

In any event, 12th place in 2023.

Maybe in 2024 Stanford will show improvement and finish in 10th place.  LOL.

[msqueri]

There were six good (Sagarin top 30) teams in the Pac-12 in 2022. That left six mediocre or worse teams - Washington State, Arizona, Cal, Arizona State, Stanford, and Colorado. The worst team in the conference by far was Colorado - Stanford would have been favored by double digits at a neutral site - but of course they now have the wind behind their sails with Coach Prime and are widely expected to look much different with a splashy infusion of talent. Still, 11.76 points (the differential Sagarin calculated between Stanford and Colorado) is a lot to make up, and it's plausible (though not guaranteed) Stanford will improve too in 2023. I understand pundits giving Colorado big benefit of the doubt to leap frog Stanford, but that's uncertain.

Aside from Colorado, there are several other teams in the Pac-12 that are bad - Arizona, Cal, and Arizona State. Among those, Arizona has a very appealing upward trajectory going on and would not/should not be considered among the most obvious on paper contenders for Pac-12 cellar dwellers, Cal is bad and will continue to be bad but has generally avoided cellar dwelling type calamity under Wilcox, and Arizona State is a wildcard due to new coaching just like Stanford and Colorado are.

Ultimately, I think I can buy any order of Colorado, Arizona State, and Colorado for the bottom three in the conference. The article is fair. My guess is Stanford does not end up being the worst just because of the odds (i.e., there are multiple contenders) but we very well may be.

[msqueri]

There were six good (Sagarin top 30) teams in the Pac-12 in 2022. That left six mediocre or worse teams - Washington State, Arizona, Cal, Arizona State, Stanford, and Colorado. The worst team in the conference by far was Colorado - Stanford would have been favored by double digits at a neutral site - but of course they now have the wind behind their sails with Coach Prime and are widely expected to look much different with a splashy infusion of talent. Still, 11.76 points (the differential Sagarin calculated between Stanford and Colorado) is a lot to make up, and it's plausible (though not guaranteed) Stanford will improve too in 2023. I understand pundits giving Colorado big benefit of the doubt to leap frog Stanford, but that's uncertain.

Aside from Colorado, there are several other teams in the Pac-12 that are bad - Arizona, Cal, and Arizona State. Among those, Arizona has a very appealing upward trajectory going on and would not/should not be considered among the most obvious on paper contenders for Pac-12 cellar dwellers, Cal is bad and will continue to be bad but has generally avoided cellar dwelling type calamity under Wilcox, and Arizona State is a wildcard due to new coaching just like Stanford and Colorado are.

Ultimately, I think I can buy any order of Colorado, Arizona State, and Colorado for the bottom three in the conference. The article is fair. My guess is Stanford does not end up being the worst just because of the odds (i.e., there are multiple contenders) but we very well may be.

[Giants]

Predictions made prior to the close of the second transfer portal in May are problematic.  Following spring ball, schools with a new head coach and easy access to transfer talent (CU and ASU) will have a much better idea of their needs.  At the same time, many players from other schools will also have a better understanding of their chances to see the field playing for a coach who is not bound to the existing roster.

[Giants]

Predictions made prior to the close of the second transfer portal in May are problematic.  Following spring ball, schools with a new head coach and easy access to transfer talent (CU and ASU) will have a much better idea of their needs.  At the same time, many players from other schools will also have a better understanding of their chances to see the field playing for a coach who is not bound to the existing roster.

[SamuelMcF]

2023 is a total rebuild year and all about instilling a new culture and setting up for 2024 and beyond. This thing is gonna take time since we're not reloading the roster with 10+ transfers a year. I'm perfectly fine with that. I have zero expectations other than beating Hawaii and Sac State, and am looking forward to seeing an offensive scheme that doesn't actively hinder its players and take 3 years to "master."

[SamuelMcF]

2023 is a total rebuild year and all about instilling a new culture and setting up for 2024 and beyond. This thing is gonna take time since we're not reloading the roster with 10+ transfers a year. I'm perfectly fine with that. I have zero expectations other than beating Hawaii and Sac State, and am looking forward to seeing an offensive scheme that doesn't actively hinder its players and take 3 years to "master."

[Giants]

2023 is a total rebuild year and all about instilling a new culture and setting up for 2024 and beyond. This thing is gonna take time since we're not reloading the roster with 10+ transfers a year. I'm perfectly fine with that. I have zero expectations other than beating Hawaii and Sac State, and am looking forward to seeing an offensive scheme that doesn't actively hinder its players and take 3 years to "master."

Add one shocking upset (that gives us a sneak peak into the future of Stanford football) and you have my “problematic prediction” of 3-9.

[Giants]

2023 is a total rebuild year and all about instilling a new culture and setting up for 2024 and beyond. This thing is gonna take time since we're not reloading the roster with 10+ transfers a year. I'm perfectly fine with that. I have zero expectations other than beating Hawaii and Sac State, and am looking forward to seeing an offensive scheme that doesn't actively hinder its players and take 3 years to "master."

Add one shocking upset (that gives us a sneak peak into the future of Stanford football) and you have my “problematic prediction” of 3-9.

[Farm93]

Colorado will be better.  I am confident he will get several ACC & SEC types to transfer.  Add in his ability to actually coach and they will be fine.

Stanford just can't utilize the transfer reset button, unlike almost every other program in the NCAA.   The players certainly can leave, but realistically only prospective freshman can enter.   Worse, the number of athletes able to complete at the FBS level and get into Stanford is very limited.   Coach T won't be able to add several late commits for the Class of 2024 and it will even be difficult for him to build a massive incoming class for 2025.

At Stanford it will be a much, much longer process.  Not just a lengthy process this time, but a lengthy transition whenever a football head coach departs.

FWIW - Given the State of the Haase program and the lack of late game, late season and post-season success over 6+ seasons, I would be all in on enduring a multi-year transition for the hoops team.

[Farm93]

Colorado will be better.  I am confident he will get several ACC & SEC types to transfer.  Add in his ability to actually coach and they will be fine.

Stanford just can't utilize the transfer reset button, unlike almost every other program in the NCAA.   The players certainly can leave, but realistically only prospective freshman can enter.   Worse, the number of athletes able to complete at the FBS level and get into Stanford is very limited.   Coach T won't be able to add several late commits for the Class of 2024 and it will even be difficult for him to build a massive incoming class for 2025.

At Stanford it will be a much, much longer process.  Not just a lengthy process this time, but a lengthy transition whenever a football head coach departs.

FWIW - Given the State of the Haase program and the lack of late game, late season and post-season success over 6+ seasons, I would be all in on enduring a multi-year transition for the hoops team.

[BostonCard]

While the circumstances were somewhat different when Harbaugh came to Stanford, it is worth noting that in his first year, we went from 1-11 to 4-8, then 5-7, then 8-5, and then 12-1.

I think it is fair to point out that Shaw did not, as a rule, under-recruit; his recruits underperformed.  Our much maligned current class (2023) ranks 8th in the Pac-12, and that is by far the worst of the recent classes.  The 2022 class (next year's sophomores) ranked 2nd in the Pac-12, the 2021 class (juniors next year) was 7th, the 2020 class (seniors) was ranked third, and the 2019 (or what's left of them) was also ranked 3rd.  Even if you penalize the classes for attrition without the possibility of meaningful accretion, it is hard to believe that the building blocks would add up to a dead last in the conference outcome.

BC

[BostonCard]

While the circumstances were somewhat different when Harbaugh came to Stanford, it is worth noting that in his first year, we went from 1-11 to 4-8, then 5-7, then 8-5, and then 12-1.

I think it is fair to point out that Shaw did not, as a rule, under-recruit; his recruits underperformed.  Our much maligned current class (2023) ranks 8th in the Pac-12, and that is by far the worst of the recent classes.  The 2022 class (next year's sophomores) ranked 2nd in the Pac-12, the 2021 class (juniors next year) was 7th, the 2020 class (seniors) was ranked third, and the 2019 (or what's left of them) was also ranked 3rd.  Even if you penalize the classes for attrition without the possibility of meaningful accretion, it is hard to believe that the building blocks would add up to a dead last in the conference outcome.

BC

[Giants]

BC, here is the problem with using recruiting data from years past to predict future results…

Transfers are not part of that equation.  To wit…

2023 National transfer rankings as of today (247Sports):

3. Colorado
4. USC
7. UCLA
11. Oregon 
12. Arizona State

Yep, 5 of the 12 top destinations in the country are in the PAC-12.  The influence of transfers is almost as important as initial HS signings, if not more so….

Update: I just read an article at The Athletic detailing the recruitment of Coach Prime to Colorado. He stated that goal is to develop a roster comprised of 40% grad transfers, 40% undergrad transfers and 20% HS recruits. Time will tell whether this approach can be sustainable….

[Giants]

BC, here is the problem with using recruiting data from years past to predict future results…

Transfers are not part of that equation.  To wit…

2023 National transfer rankings as of today (247Sports):

3. Colorado
4. USC
7. UCLA
11. Oregon 
12. Arizona State

Yep, 5 of the 12 top destinations in the country are in the PAC-12.  The influence of transfers is almost as important as initial HS signings, if not more so….

Update: I just read an article at The Athletic detailing the recruitment of Coach Prime to Colorado. He stated that goal is to develop a roster comprised of 40% grad transfers, 40% undergrad transfers and 20% HS recruits. Time will tell whether this approach can be sustainable….