[CTcard]

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? 

With the previous post I was being neither optimistic nor pessimistic about prospects for the OL for next year. I merely was pointing out that it is hard to be confident that there will be no dropoff when the last time the same thing happened there was a brobdingnagian dropoff.

Personally, I am optimistic that the OL will be quite good in 2016, since there are obvious replacements for the departed folks and they have individually performed reasonably in game conditions. On the other hand, I was optimistic about the OL going into 2014 as well.

The fact that some team, somewhere has replaced many OL starters and still played well only shows it is a possibility, not that it is likely.

[Strictly speaking, Clemson is starting 4 OL who had a start in 2014 - though they weren't "the starters".]

[CTcard]

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? 

With the previous post I was being neither optimistic nor pessimistic about prospects for the OL for next year. I merely was pointing out that it is hard to be confident that there will be no dropoff when the last time the same thing happened there was a brobdingnagian dropoff.

Personally, I am optimistic that the OL will be quite good in 2016, since there are obvious replacements for the departed folks and they have individually performed reasonably in game conditions. On the other hand, I was optimistic about the OL going into 2014 as well.

The fact that some team, somewhere has replaced many OL starters and still played well only shows it is a possibility, not that it is likely.

[Strictly speaking, Clemson is starting 4 OL who had a start in 2014 - though they weren't "the starters".]