[FarEastStanfan]

We had a run there where we were getting recruits whose number one priority is football. With a mediocre team, we are back to getting academic first recruits and need to lower our standards and offer more players as we aren't filling up our class.  I think Northwestern is the new level of the program.  They get mostly three stars and do a good job coaching them up to often have a winning record and occasionally are ranked. I think Shaw can sustain us at the Fitzgerald NW level with a mixture of winning and losing seasons, but I think the days of regular major bowls and conference championships are permanently in the rearview mirror. It was fun while it lasted.

There's a lot of this quote that I agree with, particularly the comparison to Northwestern (could add Duke to the short list, as well). But I don't agree with the idea that this is necessarily a "permanent" change. If Stanford makes a commitment to making it back to the earlier level of being ranked and seriously contending for New Years Day bowls, I think the program can get there. But it would require returning to a more aggressive approach to recruiting and perhaps pushing the envelope a bit on admissions. I'm not sure that the current coaching staff (and administration) is willing to go there. And as we see: a program like USC can have down years, but its reputation as a football power allows it to continue to recruit top athletes; a school like Stanford has a couple of years of mediocrity and suddenly it's seen as an all-academic program. The pressure is on Stanford to keep the success rolling (or now, to get back there as quickly as possible)

[FarEastStanfan]

We had a run there where we were getting recruits whose number one priority is football. With a mediocre team, we are back to getting academic first recruits and need to lower our standards and offer more players as we aren't filling up our class.  I think Northwestern is the new level of the program.  They get mostly three stars and do a good job coaching them up to often have a winning record and occasionally are ranked. I think Shaw can sustain us at the Fitzgerald NW level with a mixture of winning and losing seasons, but I think the days of regular major bowls and conference championships are permanently in the rearview mirror. It was fun while it lasted.

There's a lot of this quote that I agree with, particularly the comparison to Northwestern (could add Duke to the short list, as well). But I don't agree with the idea that this is necessarily a "permanent" change. If Stanford makes a commitment to making it back to the earlier level of being ranked and seriously contending for New Years Day bowls, I think the program can get there. But it would require returning to a more aggressive approach to recruiting and perhaps pushing the envelope a bit on admissions. I'm not sure that the current coaching staff (and administration) is willing to go there. And as we see: a program like USC can have down years, but its reputation as a football power allows it to continue to recruit top athletes; a school like Stanford has a couple of years of mediocrity and suddenly it's seen as an all-academic program. The pressure is on Stanford to keep the success rolling (or now, to get back there as quickly as possible)