[CTcard]

I am not quite sure what is the theory you are asking us about. Is it that a unit that is poor one year usually improves the next because of focus?

There seems to be a lot of trepidation about the prospects for the Stanford football offense in 2017.  If you look at 2016 as a reason, that certainly seems warranted, based on poor pass protection and inconsistent QB play that season. 

I would put myself into the cautiously optimistic camp, perhaps with an excess of caution however. 

While poor pass protection and QB play are some reasons for concern about the offense, they are actually both reasons for expecting improvement. The OL returns four starters and presumably is unlikely to face more injury trouble than last year. The QBs are all back, and whomever ends up playing ought to be improved - as Chryst clearly was over the latter stretch last year. So, at least as far as trend goes, I see both of those units as a positive.

A big question mark is replacing McCaffrey. In general, I fall into the NFL-ish camp that says the quality of the run game is more dependent upon the OL than the RB - or at least that is where the variation usually arises. However, McCaffrey was not a typical RB. He really was a transcendent talent, and I fear he created positive plays where a merely good back will not. And as of yet, we don't know if Love (or anyone) is more than a good back.

However, David Shaw interviews have suggested the offense will be spreading the ball around more than the last couple years,

I haven't seen that. Can you point us to some examples?

Essentially by default we are going to spread the ball around to more players than we did with McCaffrey on the team. Other than that, I am not necessarily convinced that development is a positive - it could just mean there are no particularly great weapons on offense.

and that he feels the team will be better in 2017 than 2016 overall.

This ought to be true. We had exceedingly few departures of key personnel for a college team, and players from well regarded recruiting classes who will start contributing.

Hard to see significant defensive improvement with the DL situation,

The DL is a worry, but I absolutely expect significant defensive improvement. First of all, we have ... eight and a half starters back* and most every contributor. There shouldn't be many personnel holes. The injury to Holder was a big impact, as were lesser injuries all around. My instinct is to really like the move of Alfieri inside, though of course the proof will be in the pudding. And more generally, Stanford's defense was only "good" last year (though FEI really liked us, #11 overall), not the dominant unit it has been recently. I see no reason it cannot be dominant again.

so the only place much improvement can come would seem to be the offense. 

Given that the offense was considerably worse than the defense last year, despite what I said above there is clearly more room for improvement on that side of the ball.

[CTcard]

I am not quite sure what is the theory you are asking us about. Is it that a unit that is poor one year usually improves the next because of focus?

There seems to be a lot of trepidation about the prospects for the Stanford football offense in 2017.  If you look at 2016 as a reason, that certainly seems warranted, based on poor pass protection and inconsistent QB play that season. 

I would put myself into the cautiously optimistic camp, perhaps with an excess of caution however. 

While poor pass protection and QB play are some reasons for concern about the offense, they are actually both reasons for expecting improvement. The OL returns four starters and presumably is unlikely to face more injury trouble than last year. The QBs are all back, and whomever ends up playing ought to be improved - as Chryst clearly was over the latter stretch last year. So, at least as far as trend goes, I see both of those units as a positive.

A big question mark is replacing McCaffrey. In general, I fall into the NFL-ish camp that says the quality of the run game is more dependent upon the OL than the RB - or at least that is where the variation usually arises. However, McCaffrey was not a typical RB. He really was a transcendent talent, and I fear he created positive plays where a merely good back will not. And as of yet, we don't know if Love (or anyone) is more than a good back.

However, David Shaw interviews have suggested the offense will be spreading the ball around more than the last couple years,

I haven't seen that. Can you point us to some examples?

Essentially by default we are going to spread the ball around to more players than we did with McCaffrey on the team. Other than that, I am not necessarily convinced that development is a positive - it could just mean there are no particularly great weapons on offense.

and that he feels the team will be better in 2017 than 2016 overall.

This ought to be true. We had exceedingly few departures of key personnel for a college team, and players from well regarded recruiting classes who will start contributing.

Hard to see significant defensive improvement with the DL situation,

The DL is a worry, but I absolutely expect significant defensive improvement. First of all, we have ... eight and a half starters back* and most every contributor. There shouldn't be many personnel holes. The injury to Holder was a big impact, as were lesser injuries all around. My instinct is to really like the move of Alfieri inside, though of course the proof will be in the pudding. And more generally, Stanford's defense was only "good" last year (though FEI really liked us, #11 overall), not the dominant unit it has been recently. I see no reason it cannot be dominant again.

so the only place much improvement can come would seem to be the offense. 

Given that the offense was considerably worse than the defense last year, despite what I said above there is clearly more room for improvement on that side of the ball.