[washingtonismoney]

Sometimes you get yield issues.  Sometimes you get too many, sometimes you don't get enough.  I'm sure they were expecting a year similar to past years.

Sure. Some error around the margins is understandable. I'm just saying the strategy was clearly wrong, and borne out of excessive hope. The shortfalls -- at offensive line and inside linebacker -- are clear examples of a flawed strategy.

Let's start with offensive line. Beat reporters indicated early in the year that the staff was targeting 1 offensive lineman for the class. This is a reckless strategy, for reasons I've already insisted on. They proceeded to offer a guy named Jemaree Salyer, who made some nice noises about Stanford but ultimately never showed much actual interest. I don't believe he ever visited. It was pretty clear that, unlike (say) Dax Hollifield, he was intrigued but not really interested. Which, fine. Stanford's not for everyone and that's not a diss on either Stanford or Salyer.

Nevertheless, the coaches were verrrryyyyy slow on developing backup options. They offered Chris Murray in the summer, Nick Petit-Frere in September, and Trey Stratford in December. Given Murray's eventual denial (we presume), the coaches shouldn't have counted on him. Offering the eventual #11 player in September is practically the definition of shooting the moon. It's fortunate Trey Stratford was so interested in Stanford, as a backstop.

Meanwhile there were several guys -- including players who went to SC -- who were pretty darn interested in Stanford and never offered. Had the coaches gone in with a dynamic process, recognizing that your frontline guy will often not come or unanticipated openings will develop, they might've offered them in the summer and filled the pipeline with solid though not overwhelming recruits. You, simply put, need numbers.

The picture is similar at linebacker. Hollifield, an extremely highly touted recruit, was always going to be a tough pull. He reportedly was unsure about moving cross-country. Again, nothing wrong with missing out on a guy who's highly coveted and might want to stay close at home. What *is* wrong, and looks like carelessness, is to not develop more backup options. Given that Mangum-Farrar and Caleb Kelly both had (reportedly) rough rides academically before eventually getting in -- which is a great testament to their dedication and character -- it's possible the numbers picture would've gotten even worse than it was.

Throwing up your hands and saying "well, it's just yield" is a bit odd. These aren't horoscopes; we're not asking them to do divinations based on bird bones. This is a reasonably predictable process whose risks and benefits can be managed. (As evidenced by the fact that plenty of informed fans were consistently warning that something like this would come to pass this year.) Yes, sometimes, despite your best efforts the unanticipated happens and wipes out your crops. But negligence is no excuse for misfortune.

And while the coaches had a great class last year, past success only mitigates present failures. They should learn from their mistakes and lessen the odds of a screw-up in the future. I see some evidence of that in the class of '19, but they've missed out on a number of their top targets already, and it's frankly a disturbing trend.

[washingtonismoney]

Sometimes you get yield issues.  Sometimes you get too many, sometimes you don't get enough.  I'm sure they were expecting a year similar to past years.

Sure. Some error around the margins is understandable. I'm just saying the strategy was clearly wrong, and borne out of excessive hope. The shortfalls -- at offensive line and inside linebacker -- are clear examples of a flawed strategy.

Let's start with offensive line. Beat reporters indicated early in the year that the staff was targeting 1 offensive lineman for the class. This is a reckless strategy, for reasons I've already insisted on. They proceeded to offer a guy named Jemaree Salyer, who made some nice noises about Stanford but ultimately never showed much actual interest. I don't believe he ever visited. It was pretty clear that, unlike (say) Dax Hollifield, he was intrigued but not really interested. Which, fine. Stanford's not for everyone and that's not a diss on either Stanford or Salyer.

Nevertheless, the coaches were verrrryyyyy slow on developing backup options. They offered Chris Murray in the summer, Nick Petit-Frere in September, and Trey Stratford in December. Given Murray's eventual denial (we presume), the coaches shouldn't have counted on him. Offering the eventual #11 player in September is practically the definition of shooting the moon. It's fortunate Trey Stratford was so interested in Stanford, as a backstop.

Meanwhile there were several guys -- including players who went to SC -- who were pretty darn interested in Stanford and never offered. Had the coaches gone in with a dynamic process, recognizing that your frontline guy will often not come or unanticipated openings will develop, they might've offered them in the summer and filled the pipeline with solid though not overwhelming recruits. You, simply put, need numbers.

The picture is similar at linebacker. Hollifield, an extremely highly touted recruit, was always going to be a tough pull. He reportedly was unsure about moving cross-country. Again, nothing wrong with missing out on a guy who's highly coveted and might want to stay close at home. What *is* wrong, and looks like carelessness, is to not develop more backup options. Given that Mangum-Farrar and Caleb Kelly both had (reportedly) rough rides academically before eventually getting in -- which is a great testament to their dedication and character -- it's possible the numbers picture would've gotten even worse than it was.

Throwing up your hands and saying "well, it's just yield" is a bit odd. These aren't horoscopes; we're not asking them to do divinations based on bird bones. This is a reasonably predictable process whose risks and benefits can be managed. (As evidenced by the fact that plenty of informed fans were consistently warning that something like this would come to pass this year.) Yes, sometimes, despite your best efforts the unanticipated happens and wipes out your crops. But negligence is no excuse for misfortune.

And while the coaches had a great class last year, past success only mitigates present failures. They should learn from their mistakes and lessen the odds of a screw-up in the future. I see some evidence of that in the class of '19, but they've missed out on a number of their top targets already, and it's frankly a disturbing trend.