[CTcard]

  Two of the last three seasons the OL simply hasn't been good enough despite having massive amounts of highly recruited talent.

That's an interesting assertion. I think it should be looked at.

2014
In 2014 we had the class of 2012 OL.
It was Peat, Garnett, Shuler, Caspers, Murphy.
On balance, very highly rated recruits. From 247:
Murphy = 0.9933, #2 OT, #11 overall
Peat = 0.9848, #4 OT, #30 overall
Garnett = 0.9817, #2 OG, #38 overall
Shuler = 0.9057, #14 OG, #268 overall
Caspers = 0.8382, #60 OG, not rated overall

However, four of those were first time starters.
The OL held together and was essentially the same all year.
The OL had serious pass protection issues early, was quite good by the end of the year.

2015
Mostly the same OL as 2014
Murphy, Garnett, Shuler, Caspers, Tucker
Tucker = 0.9617, #7 OT, #82 overall (class of 2014)
Others as above.

A really excellent line, and one of the best Stanford offenses ever. Lombardi has taken to stating that it had the highest points per possession in the country. bcftoys seems to say Stanford was #2 behind Western Kentucky - but a small difference.

2016
The OL was constantly evolving due to injuries and indadequate play. Seems best to go with the line as it ended up, i.e. the Sun Bowl.
Hall, Herbig, Burkett, Caspers, Bright
Hall = 0.8625, #54 OT, #571 overall  (class of 2014)
Burkett = 0.8535, #40 OG, #726 overall (class of 2014)
Herbig = 0.8462, #45 OG, #933 overall (class of 2016)
Bright = 0.8432, #69 OT, #897 overall (class of 2013)
Caspers as above.

In the end, that was four new starters.
This OL was actually pretty good at run blocking. The RB yds/carry was the highest in many years. However, they were horrendous at pass blocking, leading to all sorts of debillitating problems for the offense.Stanford allowed the second most sacks in the conference despite the fewest passing attempts.


So, my summary of all that is ...
One might think the 2014-15 OL should have come together sooner. On the other hand it did come together and eventually became elite. That was a highly recruited and talented line.
The 2016 OL was not comprised of highly recruited kids, and overall it was not a good enough line. I would note that not having highly recruited guys isn't any out - Bloomgren/Shaw are responsible for recruiting the guys on the OL as well as teaching them once they show up.

Broadly speaking, the OL has been a strength of the Stanford team under Bloomegren and his immediate predecessors. But it is also a team that is built upon the necessity of having a very good OL - so the onus remains high going forward.

[CTcard]

  Two of the last three seasons the OL simply hasn't been good enough despite having massive amounts of highly recruited talent.

That's an interesting assertion. I think it should be looked at.

2014
In 2014 we had the class of 2012 OL.
It was Peat, Garnett, Shuler, Caspers, Murphy.
On balance, very highly rated recruits. From 247:
Murphy = 0.9933, #2 OT, #11 overall
Peat = 0.9848, #4 OT, #30 overall
Garnett = 0.9817, #2 OG, #38 overall
Shuler = 0.9057, #14 OG, #268 overall
Caspers = 0.8382, #60 OG, not rated overall

However, four of those were first time starters.
The OL held together and was essentially the same all year.
The OL had serious pass protection issues early, was quite good by the end of the year.

2015
Mostly the same OL as 2014
Murphy, Garnett, Shuler, Caspers, Tucker
Tucker = 0.9617, #7 OT, #82 overall (class of 2014)
Others as above.

A really excellent line, and one of the best Stanford offenses ever. Lombardi has taken to stating that it had the highest points per possession in the country. bcftoys seems to say Stanford was #2 behind Western Kentucky - but a small difference.

2016
The OL was constantly evolving due to injuries and indadequate play. Seems best to go with the line as it ended up, i.e. the Sun Bowl.
Hall, Herbig, Burkett, Caspers, Bright
Hall = 0.8625, #54 OT, #571 overall  (class of 2014)
Burkett = 0.8535, #40 OG, #726 overall (class of 2014)
Herbig = 0.8462, #45 OG, #933 overall (class of 2016)
Bright = 0.8432, #69 OT, #897 overall (class of 2013)
Caspers as above.

In the end, that was four new starters.
This OL was actually pretty good at run blocking. The RB yds/carry was the highest in many years. However, they were horrendous at pass blocking, leading to all sorts of debillitating problems for the offense.Stanford allowed the second most sacks in the conference despite the fewest passing attempts.


So, my summary of all that is ...
One might think the 2014-15 OL should have come together sooner. On the other hand it did come together and eventually became elite. That was a highly recruited and talented line.
The 2016 OL was not comprised of highly recruited kids, and overall it was not a good enough line. I would note that not having highly recruited guys isn't any out - Bloomgren/Shaw are responsible for recruiting the guys on the OL as well as teaching them once they show up.

Broadly speaking, the OL has been a strength of the Stanford team under Bloomegren and his immediate predecessors. But it is also a team that is built upon the necessity of having a very good OL - so the onus remains high going forward.