[stupac2]

Clemson is starting five guys who didn't start at OL in 2014, this year, including a True Frosh LT.  Stanford has recruited, developed, and coached OL very well since 2009.  Replacing 2/5 starters (especially when you have a guy like Fanaika ready to step in at LG) isn't that big of a deal, IMO.  Stanford's OL will be fine.

When will this fan base (on the Cardboard) stop being so pessimistic about various positions on the team when new guys are playing for the first time, and start being optimistic?  "Five BCS/New Years Six" bowl games in six seasons.  That doesn't happen unless you re-load each year. It's one thing for outside observers to be skeptical about Stanford, but the most loyal and passionate members of its fan base?

Yes, Stanford has to replace a lot of key players.  But A, so does everyone, and B, they have done it effectively for 5/6 years.  Stanford has more talent on its roster now than ever before.  I just don't understand why people aren't more sanguine about the program, because it's the program, not individual players that really are getting the job done.

I don't think expecting a step down from a high level of play is being pessimistic, it's being realistic. The wild-eyed optimism of most sports fans regarding their own team is, to be frank, stupid. It's a great way to set yourself up for disappointment and ignores the realities of how hard it is to maintain success (and how important luck is to overall success). After every year you should expect regression to the mean, if it doesn't happen, well then that's great. But most of the time it does.

[stupac2]

Clemson is starting five guys who didn't start at OL in 2014, this year, including a True Frosh LT.  Stanford has recruited, developed, and coached OL very well since 2009.  Replacing 2/5 starters (especially when you have a guy like Fanaika ready to step in at LG) isn't that big of a deal, IMO.  Stanford's OL will be fine.

When will this fan base (on the Cardboard) stop being so pessimistic about various positions on the team when new guys are playing for the first time, and start being optimistic?  "Five BCS/New Years Six" bowl games in six seasons.  That doesn't happen unless you re-load each year. It's one thing for outside observers to be skeptical about Stanford, but the most loyal and passionate members of its fan base?

Yes, Stanford has to replace a lot of key players.  But A, so does everyone, and B, they have done it effectively for 5/6 years.  Stanford has more talent on its roster now than ever before.  I just don't understand why people aren't more sanguine about the program, because it's the program, not individual players that really are getting the job done.

I don't think expecting a step down from a high level of play is being pessimistic, it's being realistic. The wild-eyed optimism of most sports fans regarding their own team is, to be frank, stupid. It's a great way to set yourself up for disappointment and ignores the realities of how hard it is to maintain success (and how important luck is to overall success). After every year you should expect regression to the mean, if it doesn't happen, well then that's great. But most of the time it does.