[CTcard]

The second is that our ranking is accurate but imprecise.  In other words, while a 9-4 record is our most likely outcome, the uncertainty associated with our ranking is such that the writer believes we could end up with a 12-1 ranking heading into the playoff decision, but could also wind up with a losing record and unranked.

I think the latter view is probably more likely.  ...

While imprecise is a bit of an odd description for the prediction of a single event, I basically agree that I see greater uncertainty as to how Stanford will do this year than most.

The basic breakdown of the team is pretty clear. Lots of experience and apparent talent returning on the offense - lots of new guys who have played little to none at Stanford on defense.

The optimistic view is that the returning guys on offense mean that unit will be the best we've seen since 2011, continuing on and matching the performance over the final three games last year.  The defense will have a bunch of new athletes, but they really are athletes (and were highly recruited) playing for the part of the coaching staff that has proved its chops and can get stellar performance out of just about anybody. 

The pessimistic view is that the only place we have significant experience returning is on a unit that cannot get its act together regardless of experience; and the talent isn't all that great anyway - which other Pac 12 team would trade their WRs for a unit that last year ranked #34, unranked, and unranked in the conference (receptions/game). The only unit that has been consistently good, the defense, just lost basically everyone and now consists of a bunch of new guys will run around lost all year. 

At this point, especially with closed practices and all, choosing one of the above is pretty much a personality test.

p.s. Not sure the guys on the radio program discussed really knew enough to make the inaccurate vs imprecise distinction with respect to Stanford, other than the fact that the whole topic came up under their claim that outside of Ohio State the college football pecking order is highly variable right now.

[CTcard]

The second is that our ranking is accurate but imprecise.  In other words, while a 9-4 record is our most likely outcome, the uncertainty associated with our ranking is such that the writer believes we could end up with a 12-1 ranking heading into the playoff decision, but could also wind up with a losing record and unranked.

I think the latter view is probably more likely.  ...

While imprecise is a bit of an odd description for the prediction of a single event, I basically agree that I see greater uncertainty as to how Stanford will do this year than most.

The basic breakdown of the team is pretty clear. Lots of experience and apparent talent returning on the offense - lots of new guys who have played little to none at Stanford on defense.

The optimistic view is that the returning guys on offense mean that unit will be the best we've seen since 2011, continuing on and matching the performance over the final three games last year.  The defense will have a bunch of new athletes, but they really are athletes (and were highly recruited) playing for the part of the coaching staff that has proved its chops and can get stellar performance out of just about anybody. 

The pessimistic view is that the only place we have significant experience returning is on a unit that cannot get its act together regardless of experience; and the talent isn't all that great anyway - which other Pac 12 team would trade their WRs for a unit that last year ranked #34, unranked, and unranked in the conference (receptions/game). The only unit that has been consistently good, the defense, just lost basically everyone and now consists of a bunch of new guys will run around lost all year. 

At this point, especially with closed practices and all, choosing one of the above is pretty much a personality test.

p.s. Not sure the guys on the radio program discussed really knew enough to make the inaccurate vs imprecise distinction with respect to Stanford, other than the fact that the whole topic came up under their claim that outside of Ohio State the college football pecking order is highly variable right now.