[msqueri]

I am really struggling to see what the theory or trajectory is that will give us a competitive OL in 2025, 2026, 2027, unless it’s transfer ex machina. 

I really love the phrase "transfer ex machina".  Exactly the position it feels like we're in right now.

But what allowed Stanford to build the Tunnel Workers Union in the pre-transfer era?  Was it EUTM, Shannon Turley, looser admissions standards, steroids as was oft-rumored on the Cal boards, a rare bit of luck, some combination of them all?

Those were important parts of it but you missed three big ones. First, if there was ever a coach good enough to overcome the forces of nature (e.g., OL is all about age), it was Dalman. Lucking into one of the NFL’s best coaches being an alum whose season of life made coaching for us the right move for him at exactly the right time for us was a profound development in the history of Stanford football. Second, having two of the best OL in Stanford history be the same class and that class to also have arguably the best player in Stanford history (DeCastro and Martin joining Luck) was even more profound. Third, again: OL is all about age. I have a detailed empirical analysis of this I can try to post later (because I never remember how to paste in plain text from a phone) but a teaser: 

2009: Marinelli was fifth year, Beeler and Phillips fourth, DeCastro and Martin two of our best players ever

2010: Beeler, Phillips, Hall were fifth year, DeCastro and Martin two of our best players ever

2011: DeCastro, Martin, and Schwartzstein fourth year (and two of our best players ever) and Yankey and Fleming two of our best OL ever

2012: Schwartzstein fifth year, Wilkes and Danser fourth, Yankey and Fleming two of our best OL ever

2013: Wilkes and Danser fifth year, Yankey and Fleming fourth and two of our best OL ever, Peat one of our best OL ever. 

My full analysis goes 2009-2023 and analyzes not just starters but the entire depth charts and maps it out based on various efficacy metrics per year. I have also done tons of equally or even more detailed analyses for the Pac-12 or college football generally. You need old men at OL. Period. Even when we had Peat, Murphy, and Garnett we took a step back until they could get old. There is no reliable or sustainable way to recruit or develop quality OL other than to manage your roster to have as many bullies as possible. You can help yourself with a whale or two (which we now haven’t gotten for years) and coaching can matter at the margin, but ultimately just stocking your line with older guys is the way Stanford has succeeded and the way teams nationally generally succeed. Exceptions are few and far between.

[msqueri]

I am really struggling to see what the theory or trajectory is that will give us a competitive OL in 2025, 2026, 2027, unless it’s transfer ex machina. 

I really love the phrase "transfer ex machina".  Exactly the position it feels like we're in right now.

But what allowed Stanford to build the Tunnel Workers Union in the pre-transfer era?  Was it EUTM, Shannon Turley, looser admissions standards, steroids as was oft-rumored on the Cal boards, a rare bit of luck, some combination of them all?

Those were important parts of it but you missed three big ones. First, if there was ever a coach good enough to overcome the forces of nature (e.g., OL is all about age), it was Dalman. Lucking into one of the NFL’s best coaches being an alum whose season of life made coaching for us the right move for him at exactly the right time for us was a profound development in the history of Stanford football. Second, having two of the best OL in Stanford history be the same class and that class to also have arguably the best player in Stanford history (DeCastro and Martin joining Luck) was even more profound. Third, again: OL is all about age. I have a detailed empirical analysis of this I can try to post later (because I never remember how to paste in plain text from a phone) but a teaser: 

2009: Marinelli was fifth year, Beeler and Phillips fourth, DeCastro and Martin two of our best players ever

2010: Beeler, Phillips, Hall were fifth year, DeCastro and Martin two of our best players ever

2011: DeCastro, Martin, and Schwartzstein fourth year (and two of our best players ever) and Yankey and Fleming two of our best OL ever

2012: Schwartzstein fifth year, Wilkes and Danser fourth, Yankey and Fleming two of our best OL ever

2013: Wilkes and Danser fifth year, Yankey and Fleming fourth and two of our best OL ever, Peat one of our best OL ever. 

My full analysis goes 2009-2023 and analyzes not just starters but the entire depth charts and maps it out based on various efficacy metrics per year. I have also done tons of equally or even more detailed analyses for the Pac-12 or college football generally. You need old men at OL. Period. Even when we had Peat, Murphy, and Garnett we took a step back until they could get old. There is no reliable or sustainable way to recruit or develop quality OL other than to manage your roster to have as many bullies as possible. You can help yourself with a whale or two (which we now haven’t gotten for years) and coaching can matter at the margin, but ultimately just stocking your line with older guys is the way Stanford has succeeded and the way teams nationally generally succeed. Exceptions are few and far between.