[BostonCard]

[quote author=CTcard link=topic=12112.msg189760#msg189760 date=1489072002]
What we actually put on the field will depend on who shows up and flourishes.

This goes without saying, but you'd have to be wearing blinders to not realize Mills, Little, Sarell, St. Brown, Parkinson, and even Wedington are the "breed of cat" that Stanford hasn't historically had in meaningful numbers. So to assume Stanford will be playing the same style in the future with these types of athletic talents, as it did with lesser talents that won with scheme, and emphasizing one or two players, seems to me naive.  We will of course see!
[/quote]

We have had elite talent at QB, OL, and TE before.  St. Brown may be better than what we've traditionally recruited at the position (maybe Irwin compares), but we'll see what the talent on the field actually is.  I mean, Luck throwing to Baldwin and Fleener while being protected by Martin and DeCastro (all NFL players now) is pretty good precedent.

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=CTcard link=topic=12112.msg189760#msg189760 date=1489072002]
What we actually put on the field will depend on who shows up and flourishes.

This goes without saying, but you'd have to be wearing blinders to not realize Mills, Little, Sarell, St. Brown, Parkinson, and even Wedington are the "breed of cat" that Stanford hasn't historically had in meaningful numbers. So to assume Stanford will be playing the same style in the future with these types of athletic talents, as it did with lesser talents that won with scheme, and emphasizing one or two players, seems to me naive.  We will of course see!
[/quote]

We have had elite talent at QB, OL, and TE before.  St. Brown may be better than what we've traditionally recruited at the position (maybe Irwin compares), but we'll see what the talent on the field actually is.  I mean, Luck throwing to Baldwin and Fleener while being protected by Martin and DeCastro (all NFL players now) is pretty good precedent.

BC