[OutsiderFan]

The 2019 DL has the look of the best DL Stanford has had since 2015. 

Williams, Swann, and Booker should be very good. Then there is depth with DWP, Shaffer, Ryan Johnson, and the returning Peek. And I'm going to be surprised if Josh Pakola doesn't get some run like Booker did in 2018.

To me, the area that will make a difference is OLB. J. Fox, Toohill, Reid, A. Fox, possibly Umerah, and Kaufusi, and Stephon Herron Jr. (who has made clear his intentions to play as a Frosh) could provide the ability to rotate pass rushers. If Stanford can get pressure with 4 guys, the defense will be improved. If Adebo is a shutdown CB, Stanford can roll coverages to the other 2/3 of the field. I questioned if Lance Anderson should be replaced after last season. If the 2019 defense isn't better than 2018, with the talent up front, and a shutdown CB, others will be feeling the same way.

The OL may not have ideal depth, but does have some top end talent.  Costello is a talented Senior QB, a recipe for Pac-12 team success historically.  He's got some very good receiving weapons even if a little inexperienced. I expect Simi Fehoko to be a breakout star at WR and form a good unit with Michael Wilson, Osiris St. Brown, Connor Wedington and Donald Stewart. And all accounts are Colby Parkinson will be a force at TE.

RB isn't as dynamic as in recent years, but Austin Jones and Nathaniel Peat could bring some big play making ability in addition to steady production from Scarlett, Speights, and maybe Woods and Maddox?

[OutsiderFan]

The 2019 DL has the look of the best DL Stanford has had since 2015. 

Williams, Swann, and Booker should be very good. Then there is depth with DWP, Shaffer, Ryan Johnson, and the returning Peek. And I'm going to be surprised if Josh Pakola doesn't get some run like Booker did in 2018.

To me, the area that will make a difference is OLB. J. Fox, Toohill, Reid, A. Fox, possibly Umerah, and Kaufusi, and Stephon Herron Jr. (who has made clear his intentions to play as a Frosh) could provide the ability to rotate pass rushers. If Stanford can get pressure with 4 guys, the defense will be improved. If Adebo is a shutdown CB, Stanford can roll coverages to the other 2/3 of the field. I questioned if Lance Anderson should be replaced after last season. If the 2019 defense isn't better than 2018, with the talent up front, and a shutdown CB, others will be feeling the same way.

The OL may not have ideal depth, but does have some top end talent.  Costello is a talented Senior QB, a recipe for Pac-12 team success historically.  He's got some very good receiving weapons even if a little inexperienced. I expect Simi Fehoko to be a breakout star at WR and form a good unit with Michael Wilson, Osiris St. Brown, Connor Wedington and Donald Stewart. And all accounts are Colby Parkinson will be a force at TE.

RB isn't as dynamic as in recent years, but Austin Jones and Nathaniel Peat could bring some big play making ability in addition to steady production from Scarlett, Speights, and maybe Woods and Maddox?

[pcgoode]

I think you right about all you've said below.  Let's hope the injury bug doesn't bite again this year.

The 2019 DL has the look of the best DL Stanford has had since 2015. 

Williams, Swann, and Booker should be very good. Then there is depth with DWP, Shaffer, Ryan Johnson, and the returning Peek. And I'm going to be surprised if Josh Pakola doesn't get some run like Booker did in 2018.

To me, the area that will make a difference is OLB. J. Fox, Toohill, Reid, A. Fox, possibly Umerah, and Kaufusi, and Stephon Herron Jr. (who has made clear his intentions to play as a Frosh) could provide the ability to rotate pass rushers. If Stanford can get pressure with 4 guys, the defense will be improved. If Adebo is a shutdown CB, Stanford can roll coverages to the other 2/3 of the field. I questioned if Lance Anderson should be replaced after last season. If the 2019 defense isn't better than 2018, with the talent up front, and a shutdown CB, others will be feeling the same way.

The OL may not have ideal depth, but does have some top end talent.  Costello is a talented Senior QB, a recipe for Pac-12 team success historically.  He's got some very good receiving weapons even if a little inexperienced. I expect Simi Fehoko to be a breakout star at WR and form a good unit with Michael Wilson, Osiris St. Brown, Connor Wedington and Donald Stewart. And all accounts are Colby Parkinson will be a force at TE.  

RB isn't as dynamic as in recent years, but Austin Jones and Nathaniel Peat could bring some big play making ability in addition to steady production from Scarlett, Speights, and maybe Woods and Maddox?

[pcgoode]

I think you right about all you've said below.  Let's hope the injury bug doesn't bite again this year.

The 2019 DL has the look of the best DL Stanford has had since 2015. 

Williams, Swann, and Booker should be very good. Then there is depth with DWP, Shaffer, Ryan Johnson, and the returning Peek. And I'm going to be surprised if Josh Pakola doesn't get some run like Booker did in 2018.

To me, the area that will make a difference is OLB. J. Fox, Toohill, Reid, A. Fox, possibly Umerah, and Kaufusi, and Stephon Herron Jr. (who has made clear his intentions to play as a Frosh) could provide the ability to rotate pass rushers. If Stanford can get pressure with 4 guys, the defense will be improved. If Adebo is a shutdown CB, Stanford can roll coverages to the other 2/3 of the field. I questioned if Lance Anderson should be replaced after last season. If the 2019 defense isn't better than 2018, with the talent up front, and a shutdown CB, others will be feeling the same way.

The OL may not have ideal depth, but does have some top end talent.  Costello is a talented Senior QB, a recipe for Pac-12 team success historically.  He's got some very good receiving weapons even if a little inexperienced. I expect Simi Fehoko to be a breakout star at WR and form a good unit with Michael Wilson, Osiris St. Brown, Connor Wedington and Donald Stewart. And all accounts are Colby Parkinson will be a force at TE.  

RB isn't as dynamic as in recent years, but Austin Jones and Nathaniel Peat could bring some big play making ability in addition to steady production from Scarlett, Speights, and maybe Woods and Maddox?

[Goose]

RB isn't as dynamic as in recent years, but Austin Jones and Nathaniel Peat could bring some big play making ability in addition to steady production from Scarlett, Speights, and maybe Woods and Maddox?

I agree with your analysis of our team. The only place I think (hope) we may actually be better than you project is  at RB. Naturally, this interacts with the OL being able to make holes, but if the OL is halfway good, I think we can return to the run as a reliable way to control the ball and reduce the load on the defense. Even when Bryce Love was really putting up big numbers, we often couldn't control the ball because we couldn't reliably convert a third and less than two. The big standard deviation of the run game in this period has been discussed at length. This year, the run game may not yield lots of long gains, but if it can reliably make 3+ yards in almost all situations, that will be a giant plus.

[Goose]

RB isn't as dynamic as in recent years, but Austin Jones and Nathaniel Peat could bring some big play making ability in addition to steady production from Scarlett, Speights, and maybe Woods and Maddox?

I agree with your analysis of our team. The only place I think (hope) we may actually be better than you project is  at RB. Naturally, this interacts with the OL being able to make holes, but if the OL is halfway good, I think we can return to the run as a reliable way to control the ball and reduce the load on the defense. Even when Bryce Love was really putting up big numbers, we often couldn't control the ball because we couldn't reliably convert a third and less than two. The big standard deviation of the run game in this period has been discussed at length. This year, the run game may not yield lots of long gains, but if it can reliably make 3+ yards in almost all situations, that will be a giant plus.

[SamuelMcF]

Langdude, you're missing a few more frosh walk-ons: OG Matt Moore, S Jason Kaul, and S Spencer Jorgensen.

[SamuelMcF]

Langdude, you're missing a few more frosh walk-ons: OG Matt Moore, S Jason Kaul, and S Spencer Jorgensen.

[Langdude]

Langdude, you're missing a few more frosh walk-ons: OG Matt Moore, S Jason Kaul, and S Spencer Jorgensen.

Woah! I did miss them. How did you find out about them? Did they update the roster?

I will add them soon. Thanks so much, SMF.

-m.

[Langdude]

Langdude, you're missing a few more frosh walk-ons: OG Matt Moore, S Jason Kaul, and S Spencer Jorgensen.

Woah! I did miss them. How did you find out about them? Did they update the roster?

I will add them soon. Thanks so much, SMF.

-m.

[BobK]

They did update the roster. Also added Isaiah Brandt-Sims for a 6th year but I have my doubts on that. Clerical error ??

[BobK]

They did update the roster. Also added Isaiah Brandt-Sims for a 6th year but I have my doubts on that. Clerical error ??

[Langdude]

Langdude, you're missing a few more frosh walk-ons: OG Matt Moore, S Jason Kaul, and S Spencer Jorgensen.

For whatever reason, Matthew Moore is not listed on the roster, but he is in the Abeytia article (which is where I am assuming you got his name), which names Kale Lucas but not Jorgensen. Anyway, I added Moore, too, despite the fact that he's not yet officially listed. All three now on the chart with numbers adjusted.

---

They did update the roster.   Also added Isaiah Brandt-Sims for a 6th year but I have my doubts on that.   Clerical error ??

The IBS appearance is weird. I think - and I've been wrong about this before - the only way you can get a sixth year is if you have two injury-induced redshirts, and I assume his first was not injury-related. Anyway, it could be an error. I'll wait until getting confirmation before adding him back on.

-m.

[Langdude]

Langdude, you're missing a few more frosh walk-ons: OG Matt Moore, S Jason Kaul, and S Spencer Jorgensen.

For whatever reason, Matthew Moore is not listed on the roster, but he is in the Abeytia article (which is where I am assuming you got his name), which names Kale Lucas but not Jorgensen. Anyway, I added Moore, too, despite the fact that he's not yet officially listed. All three now on the chart with numbers adjusted.

---

They did update the roster.   Also added Isaiah Brandt-Sims for a 6th year but I have my doubts on that.   Clerical error ??

The IBS appearance is weird. I think - and I've been wrong about this before - the only way you can get a sixth year is if you have two injury-induced redshirts, and I assume his first was not injury-related. Anyway, it could be an error. I'll wait until getting confirmation before adding him back on.

-m.

[Phogge]

Bobbbbbbbb, would that be Spider Jorgensen?

[Phogge]

Bobbbbbbbb, would that be Spider Jorgensen?

[BobK]

Trivia with my brother yesterday
What team did Rick Berry leave the Warriors for.

He missed first try my hint was Spider Jorgenson

[BobK]

Trivia with my brother yesterday
What team did Rick Berry leave the Warriors for.

He missed first try my hint was Spider Jorgenson

[Mick]

Trivia with my brother yesterday
What team did Rick Berry leave the Warriors for.

He missed first try my hint was Spider Jorgenson

Houston Rockets?

[Mick]

Trivia with my brother yesterday
What team did Rick Berry leave the Warriors for.

He missed first try my hint was Spider Jorgenson

Houston Rockets?

[BobK]

The Oakland Oaks


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Barry

[BobK]

The Oakland Oaks


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Barry

[BleedCardinal]

Bill Connelly of SB Nation dropped his Stanford preview today.

The optimist in me hopes that the injury issues last year were symptomatic of S&C disfunction with the Turley situation unfolding behind the scenes, and, with better luck on that end and continued player development on the defensive side of the ball, we end up looking better than nearly all signs would suggest.

[BleedCardinal]

Bill Connelly of SB Nation dropped his Stanford preview today.

The optimist in me hopes that the injury issues last year were symptomatic of S&C disfunction with the Turley situation unfolding behind the scenes, and, with better luck on that end and continued player development on the defensive side of the ball, we end up looking better than nearly all signs would suggest.

[BostonCard]

Connolly's preview is pretty reasonable, though I'm a bit more pessimistic than he is.  I can't shake a feeling that Costello, without his oversized receivers outmuscling DB's for contested balls, seems poised to regress this year.  And if our running game was challenged last year, it will be in worse shape this year without a proven running back and a thin offensive line.  Last year, we were a 6.1 yards per play team; with our losses, I think we lose about 0.25 - 0.5 yards per play, which would put us in a position comparable to 2016, when we had 5.77 ypp (and in the bottom half of the Pac-12).

On defense, Connolly identifies our weaknesses.  The question marks at safety and linebacker are very large.  Malik Antoine is the only player with any meaningful experience.  Head has 3 career tackles.   Robinson is highly touted, but has 36 career tackles.  Beecher is a senior with 7 lifetime tackles; and the rest redshirted last year.  We are very strong at defensive line, and in solid shape at CB (anchored by Adebo), but without linebackers and safeties, we will be very vulnerable in the middle of the field.  It's hard to see us improve on the 5.7 yards per play than we did last year, unless we get unexpected contributions at positions that right now are big question marks.

This to me smells like a 6-6 team.  Obviously, if there are answers at the questions, there is a lot of potential to outperform, and a 10-win season is not out of the question.  On the other hand, we are a couple of injuries (no worse than last year) at key positions away from a truly miserable season where 4-8 or worse are within the realm of possibility.

BC

[BostonCard]

Connolly's preview is pretty reasonable, though I'm a bit more pessimistic than he is.  I can't shake a feeling that Costello, without his oversized receivers outmuscling DB's for contested balls, seems poised to regress this year.  And if our running game was challenged last year, it will be in worse shape this year without a proven running back and a thin offensive line.  Last year, we were a 6.1 yards per play team; with our losses, I think we lose about 0.25 - 0.5 yards per play, which would put us in a position comparable to 2016, when we had 5.77 ypp (and in the bottom half of the Pac-12).

On defense, Connolly identifies our weaknesses.  The question marks at safety and linebacker are very large.  Malik Antoine is the only player with any meaningful experience.  Head has 3 career tackles.   Robinson is highly touted, but has 36 career tackles.  Beecher is a senior with 7 lifetime tackles; and the rest redshirted last year.  We are very strong at defensive line, and in solid shape at CB (anchored by Adebo), but without linebackers and safeties, we will be very vulnerable in the middle of the field.  It's hard to see us improve on the 5.7 yards per play than we did last year, unless we get unexpected contributions at positions that right now are big question marks.

This to me smells like a 6-6 team.  Obviously, if there are answers at the questions, there is a lot of potential to outperform, and a 10-win season is not out of the question.  On the other hand, we are a couple of injuries (no worse than last year) at key positions away from a truly miserable season where 4-8 or worse are within the realm of possibility.

BC

[BostonCard]

Connolly's preview is pretty reasonable, though I'm a bit more pessimistic than he is.  I can't shake a feeling that Costello, without his oversized receivers outmuscling DB's for contested balls, seems poised to regress this year.  And if our running game was challenged last year, it will be in worse shape this year without a proven running back and a thin offensive line.  Last year, we were a 6.1 yards per play team; with our losses, I think we lose about 0.25 - 0.5 yards per play, which would put us in a position comparable to 2016, when we had 5.77 ypp (and in the bottom half of the Pac-12).

On defense, Connolly identifies our weaknesses.  The question marks at safety and linebacker are very large.  Malik Antoine is the only player with any meaningful experience.  Head has 3 career tackles.   Robinson is highly touted, but has 36 career tackles.  Beecher is a senior with 7 lifetime tackles; and the rest redshirted last year.  We are very strong at defensive line, and in solid shape at CB (anchored by Adebo), but without linebackers and safeties, we will be very vulnerable in the middle of the field.  It's hard to see us improve on the 5.7 yards per play than we did last year, unless we get unexpected contributions at positions that right now are big question marks.

This to me smells like a 6-6 team.  Obviously, if there are answers at the questions, there is a lot of potential to outperform, and a 10-win season is not out of the question.  On the other hand, we are a couple of injuries (no worse than last year) at key positions away from a truly miserable season where 4-8 or worse are within the realm of possibility.

BC

[BostonCard]

Connolly's preview is pretty reasonable, though I'm a bit more pessimistic than he is.  I can't shake a feeling that Costello, without his oversized receivers outmuscling DB's for contested balls, seems poised to regress this year.  And if our running game was challenged last year, it will be in worse shape this year without a proven running back and a thin offensive line.  Last year, we were a 6.1 yards per play team; with our losses, I think we lose about 0.25 - 0.5 yards per play, which would put us in a position comparable to 2016, when we had 5.77 ypp (and in the bottom half of the Pac-12).

On defense, Connolly identifies our weaknesses.  The question marks at safety and linebacker are very large.  Malik Antoine is the only player with any meaningful experience.  Head has 3 career tackles.   Robinson is highly touted, but has 36 career tackles.  Beecher is a senior with 7 lifetime tackles; and the rest redshirted last year.  We are very strong at defensive line, and in solid shape at CB (anchored by Adebo), but without linebackers and safeties, we will be very vulnerable in the middle of the field.  It's hard to see us improve on the 5.7 yards per play than we did last year, unless we get unexpected contributions at positions that right now are big question marks.

This to me smells like a 6-6 team.  Obviously, if there are answers at the questions, there is a lot of potential to outperform, and a 10-win season is not out of the question.  On the other hand, we are a couple of injuries (no worse than last year) at key positions away from a truly miserable season where 4-8 or worse are within the realm of possibility.

BC

[Phogge]

Entertaining schedule. Hope the O is entertaining. Firmly believe this team will overachieve. But need very much to get the recruiting mojo going again in terms of head hunting LB’s. Time for an injection of mean SOB’s similar to Skove, Gardner and Murph. And I personally care more about the 10 year decision than the 40 year one.

[Phogge]

Entertaining schedule. Hope the O is entertaining. Firmly believe this team will overachieve. But need very much to get the recruiting mojo going again in terms of head hunting LB’s. Time for an injection of mean SOB’s similar to Skove, Gardner and Murph. And I personally care more about the 10 year decision than the 40 year one.

[Mick]

Connolly's preview is pretty reasonable, though I'm a bit more pessimistic than he is.  I can't shake a feeling that Costello, without his oversized receivers outmuscling DB's for contested balls, seems poised to regress this year.  

Be interesting to see if that happens.  Costello improved from 2017 to 2018. He opened great against four weak teams, sagged in the middle hitting a low point against Notre Dame, but finished pretty strongly with three good games in his last four (all four of which won by Stanford).

[Mick]

Connolly's preview is pretty reasonable, though I'm a bit more pessimistic than he is.  I can't shake a feeling that Costello, without his oversized receivers outmuscling DB's for contested balls, seems poised to regress this year.  

Be interesting to see if that happens.  Costello improved from 2017 to 2018. He opened great against four weak teams, sagged in the middle hitting a low point against Notre Dame, but finished pretty strongly with three good games in his last four (all four of which won by Stanford).

[stupac2]

Shaw has pretty consistently fielded an elite unit on either offense or defense. He has never managed to field two in the same year. He has had three offenses finish 16th or better in Off. S&P+, but Stanford averaged a Def. S&P+ ranking of 46.3 in those years. He has had four defenses rank 12th or better, but his offense averaged 44.8 in those years. Very strange.

Am I the only one that doesn't find this all that strange? He even mentions the cause: the restricted recruiting pool. You could argue (as many of us here do) that in recent years it has been partly self-inflicted, but it's really hard to be elite on both sides of the ball at any school, when you're recruiting from like 5% of the pool and competing with more storied programs for those recruits it's going to be virtually impossible.

It sucks, because we can sit back here and think about what would've happened if 2015 had 2014's defense, etc, but I don't think it's particularly surprising. If anything the fact that we're elite on one side of the ball so frequently should be surprising.

[stupac2]

Shaw has pretty consistently fielded an elite unit on either offense or defense. He has never managed to field two in the same year. He has had three offenses finish 16th or better in Off. S&P+, but Stanford averaged a Def. S&P+ ranking of 46.3 in those years. He has had four defenses rank 12th or better, but his offense averaged 44.8 in those years. Very strange.

Am I the only one that doesn't find this all that strange? He even mentions the cause: the restricted recruiting pool. You could argue (as many of us here do) that in recent years it has been partly self-inflicted, but it's really hard to be elite on both sides of the ball at any school, when you're recruiting from like 5% of the pool and competing with more storied programs for those recruits it's going to be virtually impossible.

It sucks, because we can sit back here and think about what would've happened if 2015 had 2014's defense, etc, but I don't think it's particularly surprising. If anything the fact that we're elite on one side of the ball so frequently should be surprising.

[BleedCardinal]

 it's really hard to be elite on both sides of the ball at any school, when you're recruiting from like 5% of the pool and competing with more storied programs for those recruits it's going to be virtually impossible.

The counterpoint is that Stanford's pitch is really strong from both an academic and 'get to the league' standpoint right now, so I think we are winning more recruiting head to heads against more storied programs than one would expect. I'd also think that the academic pitch shields us from some transfer portal madness. My guess is that the ebbs and flows of offense and defense are driven more by staff turnover than it being 'virtually impossible' to field an elite team on both sides of the ball at the same time. I'm at least not willing to adjust my expectations/hopes haha

[BleedCardinal]

 it's really hard to be elite on both sides of the ball at any school, when you're recruiting from like 5% of the pool and competing with more storied programs for those recruits it's going to be virtually impossible.

The counterpoint is that Stanford's pitch is really strong from both an academic and 'get to the league' standpoint right now, so I think we are winning more recruiting head to heads against more storied programs than one would expect. I'd also think that the academic pitch shields us from some transfer portal madness. My guess is that the ebbs and flows of offense and defense are driven more by staff turnover than it being 'virtually impossible' to field an elite team on both sides of the ball at the same time. I'm at least not willing to adjust my expectations/hopes haha

[BostonCard]

Shaw has pretty consistently fielded an elite unit on either offense or defense. He has never managed to field two in the same year. He has had three offenses finish 16th or better in Off. S&P+, but Stanford averaged a Def. S&P+ ranking of 46.3 in those years. He has had four defenses rank 12th or better, but his offense averaged 44.8 in those years. Very strange.

Am I the only one that doesn't find this all that strange? He even mentions the cause: the restricted recruiting pool. You could argue (as many of us here do) that in recent years it has been partly self-inflicted, but it's really hard to be elite on both sides of the ball at any school, when you're recruiting from like 5% of the pool and competing with more storied programs for those recruits it's going to be virtually impossible.

It sucks, because we can sit back here and think about what would've happened if 2015 had 2014's defense, etc, but I don't think it's particularly surprising. If anything the fact that we're elite on one side of the ball so frequently should be surprising.

Fair point, except why can’t it be that the lack of depth affects both the offense and defense.  Like why not have offensive and defensive s&p’s both in the 20’s instead of one in the low trans and one in the 40’s.

BC

[BostonCard]

Shaw has pretty consistently fielded an elite unit on either offense or defense. He has never managed to field two in the same year. He has had three offenses finish 16th or better in Off. S&P+, but Stanford averaged a Def. S&P+ ranking of 46.3 in those years. He has had four defenses rank 12th or better, but his offense averaged 44.8 in those years. Very strange.

Am I the only one that doesn't find this all that strange? He even mentions the cause: the restricted recruiting pool. You could argue (as many of us here do) that in recent years it has been partly self-inflicted, but it's really hard to be elite on both sides of the ball at any school, when you're recruiting from like 5% of the pool and competing with more storied programs for those recruits it's going to be virtually impossible.

It sucks, because we can sit back here and think about what would've happened if 2015 had 2014's defense, etc, but I don't think it's particularly surprising. If anything the fact that we're elite on one side of the ball so frequently should be surprising.

Fair point, except why can’t it be that the lack of depth affects both the offense and defense.  Like why not have offensive and defensive s&p’s both in the 20’s instead of one in the low trans and one in the 40’s.

BC

[stupac2]

I think it's just stochastic. Unlike the OSUs and Alabamas and Clemsons of the world we can't just replace 5 stars with 5 stars, it's all about what guys can qualify, who of those want to come here, and who of those successfully make the transition. When Saban has a 4* senior who never makes the jump he just replaces him with a younger 4*, we can't always do that. And even then those teams have holes that make them vulnerable to the right program.

Plus, as you point out, depth is a big issue, especially with our current self-imposed roster limits. If a blue-blood has a 4* DL go down, oh well, now that 5* freshman gets more time. If it happens to us it can be completely devastating, and there's not a lot we can do about it because we're more reliant on getting guys and coaching them up than "we have more talent than you". Not that the coaching up doesn't happen at the other schools, it's just that it's easier to handle the random injuries when you're raking in the best talent every single year, rather than having bumper years and lean years.

Of course, there's probably some amount of "blame" to place on the staff for how they handle the situation once the players are in the building, but it's not like the coaches we have here haven't fielded damn good units in the past, so I don't know how much stock to put into that. I think we're just in a position where, given the realities of recruiting to Stanford, we're hurt more by randomness than other big-name programs.

But, honestly, it's shocking that Stanford has been a more consistently good program than, say, Oregon and USC. That shouldn't happen, and is a testament to Shaw's ability to manage the program these past 8 years.

[stupac2]

I think it's just stochastic. Unlike the OSUs and Alabamas and Clemsons of the world we can't just replace 5 stars with 5 stars, it's all about what guys can qualify, who of those want to come here, and who of those successfully make the transition. When Saban has a 4* senior who never makes the jump he just replaces him with a younger 4*, we can't always do that. And even then those teams have holes that make them vulnerable to the right program.

Plus, as you point out, depth is a big issue, especially with our current self-imposed roster limits. If a blue-blood has a 4* DL go down, oh well, now that 5* freshman gets more time. If it happens to us it can be completely devastating, and there's not a lot we can do about it because we're more reliant on getting guys and coaching them up than "we have more talent than you". Not that the coaching up doesn't happen at the other schools, it's just that it's easier to handle the random injuries when you're raking in the best talent every single year, rather than having bumper years and lean years.

Of course, there's probably some amount of "blame" to place on the staff for how they handle the situation once the players are in the building, but it's not like the coaches we have here haven't fielded damn good units in the past, so I don't know how much stock to put into that. I think we're just in a position where, given the realities of recruiting to Stanford, we're hurt more by randomness than other big-name programs.

But, honestly, it's shocking that Stanford has been a more consistently good program than, say, Oregon and USC. That shouldn't happen, and is a testament to Shaw's ability to manage the program these past 8 years.