I don't think the four QB competition line is coach speak in the slightest. It's what I assumed/predicted would be the case and makes sense. None of these QBs has proven anything and there's really no way to know much until they start playing real games. On paper it seems like a bunch of QB2 options and I don't know how the guys will differentiate themselves. For those who doubt that it could really be a four man competition, the person fans would assume is the fourth most likely (Myles Jackson) is more touted than any of the others, more accurate (Taylor’s favorite attribute) in high school, at no disadvantage in practice time/learning the offense compared to the fan favorite Lamson, and one of Taylor’s first signees so maybe some fresh blood/emotional connection. For those concerned about such a young (skipping his senior year of high school) candidate, that raises legitimate maturity questions but in terms of experience it doesn't put him at much of a disadvantage, as amazingly, three of our four QB candidates never played a senior year of high school and the whole group has combined for 31 college pass attempts. There's no experience in this room. Why wouldn't Jackson have a shot? Why would Taylor cut anybody (other than walk-ons Nelson and Mirer) out of the competition? I don't think we know anything about what QB will look like this year.
Regarding Stanford developing a niche of guys staying around for the degree and developing, I hope to see that but we have a long way to go. Under Shaw good players stayed at Stanford less long than good players stayed at football factories. That was a very bad development for our football team. And a big part of the problem is that the Stanford degree can just as easily be a reason for players to leave with a sense of accomplishment as a reason to stay. If you're talking about developing a comparative advantage, getting guys to stay 3-4 years doesn't mean anything, you'd need guys (especially linemen) to stay 4-6 years. What we saw under Shaw is the degree became the reason for being here and players felt like their business was done when the degree was done. That's not going to be a competitive formula in college football.
Regarding Stanford developing a niche of guys staying around for the degree and developing, I hope to see that but we have a long way to go. Under Shaw good players stayed at Stanford less long than good players stayed at football factories. That was a very bad development for our football team. And a big part of the problem is that the Stanford degree can just as easily be a reason for players to leave with a sense of accomplishment as a reason to stay. If you're talking about developing a comparative advantage, getting guys to stay 3-4 years doesn't mean anything, you'd need guys (especially linemen) to stay 4-6 years. What we saw under Shaw is the degree became the reason for being here and players felt like their business was done when the degree was done. That's not going to be a competitive formula in college football.