[d4cohn]

Copying my post from another thread, as I believe it addresses the three-year slippage that we all have seen:

"I really think the regression in defensive performance [can substitute overall team performance in as well] has to due with regression to the mean in recruiting rankings. Being able to take two stars like Ben Gardner, and produce All Pac-12 and NFL players was never going to be sustainable. While not every 5-star pans out, and not every staff is equally good at maximizing talent, generally speaking, the teams with the most 5-stars are the ones contending for CFP and national championships. We don't have the playoff or AP rankings for this week yet, but #1-#8 (Alabama, Clemson, ND, LSU, Michigan, Georgia, Oklahoma, and Ohio State), and several teams in #10-#15 below that in the Coaches poll, are the top recruiters in the country. They get more 4 and 5 star players than we do (except maybe ND). DL talent is particularly thin across the country (see the most recent ESPN insider article regarding concerns on DL recruiting depth in Class of 2019), so the top programs in recruiting (Alabama, Clemson, LSU, Georgia, Ohio State) are able to get standout players at a inherently thin position group. 

We generally recruit at a #15-#25 level, and the performance on the field the last three years is generally reflective of that recruiting ranking."

My point is if we want to win like a Top 10 program again (consistently and sustainably), we probably have to recruit at a Top 10 level (or very close to it). And recruiting at a Top 10 level with our strenous academic requirements is a herculean effort. If anything, our recruiting classes have become higher ranked, so it is possible that the fruits of that improved recruiting will materialize as the team continues to develop. 

I am not saying we cannot quibble about certain offensive and defensive scheme aspects. However, if people feel we are not performing up to the standard from 2011-2015, I would say look at recruiting (and our recruiting rankings relative to the CFP teams) and go from there. Looking at scheme only, without looking at recruiting, is like describing the weather based on day-to-day measurements/inferences, without examining the overall climate.

When you lose to WSU three straight seasons, the recruiting rankings arguments seem a little over blown.  Stanford has at least averaged a 20 spot higher ranking than that program for the last many seasons. Stanford also has recruited better than Utah, if you go with the rankings, and Shaw is what, 1-4 against them?

I've believed for a couple years that 2019 would be Stanford's best year to make a run back to the top of the Pac-12, but  I'm just not convinced Anderson and Pritchard (Shaw) are going to make it happen, because aside form the record, the stats are worse than Stanford's recruiting rankings, suggesting the team is underperforming its talent now, if you want to use recruiting rankings as a measure.

I think our struggles against WSU and Utah are very reasonable points to raise. For WSU, I think those matchups (particularly the home games in 2016 and this year) boiled down to DL play, and not consistently getting enough pressure on QB. For Utah, with their imposing DL, I think those games (particularly in 2014 and this year), boiled down to the OL not dealing with their pressure well enough, combined with some really silly mistakes from Costello and #51 on special teams by running into the punter. 

Regarding a possible underperformance of our recruiting ranking, I would say the strongest argument for this would be the previous development (or insufficient development) of our OL recruits. We have two consensus 5 * who are sophomores, and both have been either banged up, or simply ok to mediocre when they have played this year.

However, with a new OL coach this year, let's see if he can get the most out of these players, and the unit as a whole. Yesterday's game was pretty promising with regards to improved OL play.

[d4cohn]

Copying my post from another thread, as I believe it addresses the three-year slippage that we all have seen:

"I really think the regression in defensive performance [can substitute overall team performance in as well] has to due with regression to the mean in recruiting rankings. Being able to take two stars like Ben Gardner, and produce All Pac-12 and NFL players was never going to be sustainable. While not every 5-star pans out, and not every staff is equally good at maximizing talent, generally speaking, the teams with the most 5-stars are the ones contending for CFP and national championships. We don't have the playoff or AP rankings for this week yet, but #1-#8 (Alabama, Clemson, ND, LSU, Michigan, Georgia, Oklahoma, and Ohio State), and several teams in #10-#15 below that in the Coaches poll, are the top recruiters in the country. They get more 4 and 5 star players than we do (except maybe ND). DL talent is particularly thin across the country (see the most recent ESPN insider article regarding concerns on DL recruiting depth in Class of 2019), so the top programs in recruiting (Alabama, Clemson, LSU, Georgia, Ohio State) are able to get standout players at a inherently thin position group. 

We generally recruit at a #15-#25 level, and the performance on the field the last three years is generally reflective of that recruiting ranking."

My point is if we want to win like a Top 10 program again (consistently and sustainably), we probably have to recruit at a Top 10 level (or very close to it). And recruiting at a Top 10 level with our strenous academic requirements is a herculean effort. If anything, our recruiting classes have become higher ranked, so it is possible that the fruits of that improved recruiting will materialize as the team continues to develop. 

I am not saying we cannot quibble about certain offensive and defensive scheme aspects. However, if people feel we are not performing up to the standard from 2011-2015, I would say look at recruiting (and our recruiting rankings relative to the CFP teams) and go from there. Looking at scheme only, without looking at recruiting, is like describing the weather based on day-to-day measurements/inferences, without examining the overall climate.

When you lose to WSU three straight seasons, the recruiting rankings arguments seem a little over blown.  Stanford has at least averaged a 20 spot higher ranking than that program for the last many seasons. Stanford also has recruited better than Utah, if you go with the rankings, and Shaw is what, 1-4 against them?

I've believed for a couple years that 2019 would be Stanford's best year to make a run back to the top of the Pac-12, but  I'm just not convinced Anderson and Pritchard (Shaw) are going to make it happen, because aside form the record, the stats are worse than Stanford's recruiting rankings, suggesting the team is underperforming its talent now, if you want to use recruiting rankings as a measure.

I think our struggles against WSU and Utah are very reasonable points to raise. For WSU, I think those matchups (particularly the home games in 2016 and this year) boiled down to DL play, and not consistently getting enough pressure on QB. For Utah, with their imposing DL, I think those games (particularly in 2014 and this year), boiled down to the OL not dealing with their pressure well enough, combined with some really silly mistakes from Costello and #51 on special teams by running into the punter. 

Regarding a possible underperformance of our recruiting ranking, I would say the strongest argument for this would be the previous development (or insufficient development) of our OL recruits. We have two consensus 5 * who are sophomores, and both have been either banged up, or simply ok to mediocre when they have played this year.

However, with a new OL coach this year, let's see if he can get the most out of these players, and the unit as a whole. Yesterday's game was pretty promising with regards to improved OL play.