[FarmBoy]

Ted Miller posted a summary of Phil Steele's analysis of the # of returning OLine starts by Pac12 team. Stanford is 3rd in the conference with 82 returning starts (Oregon St is #1 followed by US.C). This is reason one I'm not worried about losing Stepfan Taylor's yards. We will probably miss him more in pass blocking than we will his rushing. It's great to have that bulwark to fall back on for our offensive continuity.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/...ine-starts

[FarmBoy]

Ted Miller posted a summary of Phil Steele's analysis of the # of returning OLine starts by Pac12 team. Stanford is 3rd in the conference with 82 returning starts (Oregon St is #1 followed by US.C). This is reason one I'm not worried about losing Stepfan Taylor's yards. We will probably miss him more in pass blocking than we will his rushing. It's great to have that bulwark to fall back on for our offensive continuity.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/...ine-starts

[slide]

interesting that Alabama is ranked #1 in preseason polls and #106 on returning OL starters.  Alabama has to replace 3 OL starters in '13; the last time faced with that problem ('09) they won the title. 

while I like the stat because I think continuity and chemistry are key for good OL play; if your OL is bad, returning the same bad OL the next year will not necessarily make the OL better.

[slide]

interesting that Alabama is ranked #1 in preseason polls and #106 on returning OL starters.  Alabama has to replace 3 OL starters in '13; the last time faced with that problem ('09) they won the title. 

while I like the stat because I think continuity and chemistry are key for good OL play; if your OL is bad, returning the same bad OL the next year will not necessarily make the OL better.

[washingtonismoney]

I wonder how applicable this stat would be if, despite returning a lot of starts, you have a lot of turnover anyway. (Basically, if you're us.)

Andrus Peat looks like presumptive the LT starter; if say, Danser wins the C job and either Garnett or Caspers wins the RG job, you're benching a guy with a fair number of starts in Wilkes. So the continuity would be lessened -- but the talent (presumably) better. Interesting how it would work out then.

[washingtonismoney]

I wonder how applicable this stat would be if, despite returning a lot of starts, you have a lot of turnover anyway. (Basically, if you're us.)

Andrus Peat looks like presumptive the LT starter; if say, Danser wins the C job and either Garnett or Caspers wins the RG job, you're benching a guy with a fair number of starts in Wilkes. So the continuity would be lessened -- but the talent (presumably) better. Interesting how it would work out then.

[AlbanyCardinal]

Considering that Stanford's DL (and LBs) wreaked havoc on Oregon's line, disrupting their QB and offensive system, one would have to think Stanford will have even more success in this area come November.

[AlbanyCardinal]

Considering that Stanford's DL (and LBs) wreaked havoc on Oregon's line, disrupting their QB and offensive system, one would have to think Stanford will have even more success in this area come November.

[FarmBoy]

Considering that Stanford's DL (and LBs) wreaked havoc on Oregon's line, disrupting their QB and offensive system, one would have to think Stanford will have even more success in this area come November.

As with all topics, Oregon fans have a litany of reasons/excuses for why data is meaningless when analyzing the all-powerful Oregon Ducks football program. One commenter on the blog: "I'm not worried one bit for Oregon. Two of their starters don't have so many because they were both judt Freshman All American's and future 1-2 round NFL draft picks. The Center is 1st Team All Pac-12 player. The other two possible starters are most likely Seniors who have played in 40+ games so I think we will be just fine. "

[FarmBoy]

Considering that Stanford's DL (and LBs) wreaked havoc on Oregon's line, disrupting their QB and offensive system, one would have to think Stanford will have even more success in this area come November.

As with all topics, Oregon fans have a litany of reasons/excuses for why data is meaningless when analyzing the all-powerful Oregon Ducks football program. One commenter on the blog: "I'm not worried one bit for Oregon. Two of their starters don't have so many because they were both judt Freshman All American's and future 1-2 round NFL draft picks. The Center is 1st Team All Pac-12 player. The other two possible starters are most likely Seniors who have played in 40+ games so I think we will be just fine. "

[pcgoode]

Considering that Stanford's DL (and LBs) wreaked havoc on Oregon's line, disrupting their QB and offensive system, one would have to think Stanford will have even more success in this area come November.

As with all topics, Oregon fans have a litany of reasons/excuses for why data is meaningless when analyzing the all-powerful Oregon Ducks football program. One commenter on the blog: "I'm not worried one bit for Oregon. Two of their starters don't have so many because they were both judt Freshman All American's and future 1-2 round NFL draft picks. The Center is 1st Team All Pac-12 player. The other two possible starters are most likely Seniors who have played in 40+ games so I think we will be just fine. "

I have been thinking the same thing for some time.  Hard to say how good the Ducks O-line will be until a little later in the season when they start playing some teams with a good front seven (October 26 vs UCLA could be interesting).  A few of them were out for the spring game, so they didn't get to show their stuff as a unit there.  The other things that I don't think have been given enough scrutiny include whether the Ducks will have the running backs to be successful (sure, DAT is super fast, but can he carry the ball 20 times a game through a whole season) and the rebuilding of the linebacker corps (Jordan, Alonso and Clay all gone).  Throw in a coaching change and continuing questions with the kicking game and I wonder if we will see two or more losses this season for the Ducks - one against us, and one against one of Washington, UCLA or Oregon State.

[pcgoode]

Considering that Stanford's DL (and LBs) wreaked havoc on Oregon's line, disrupting their QB and offensive system, one would have to think Stanford will have even more success in this area come November.

As with all topics, Oregon fans have a litany of reasons/excuses for why data is meaningless when analyzing the all-powerful Oregon Ducks football program. One commenter on the blog: "I'm not worried one bit for Oregon. Two of their starters don't have so many because they were both judt Freshman All American's and future 1-2 round NFL draft picks. The Center is 1st Team All Pac-12 player. The other two possible starters are most likely Seniors who have played in 40+ games so I think we will be just fine. "

I have been thinking the same thing for some time.  Hard to say how good the Ducks O-line will be until a little later in the season when they start playing some teams with a good front seven (October 26 vs UCLA could be interesting).  A few of them were out for the spring game, so they didn't get to show their stuff as a unit there.  The other things that I don't think have been given enough scrutiny include whether the Ducks will have the running backs to be successful (sure, DAT is super fast, but can he carry the ball 20 times a game through a whole season) and the rebuilding of the linebacker corps (Jordan, Alonso and Clay all gone).  Throw in a coaching change and continuing questions with the kicking game and I wonder if we will see two or more losses this season for the Ducks - one against us, and one against one of Washington, UCLA or Oregon State.