[gailtate]

My $0.02 on the offense.

Like many, I really like the OL position group. A couple of those guys have a little nasty streak. I like seeing them play with a chip on their shoulder.
⁠
But even with the experience and capability of the OLine, Stanford will have to show that it can run when opponents bring 7 or 8 (or even 9) defenders into the box to stop it. When Stanford runs plays with Heimuli and Fisk on the field, it's almost assuredly a run. Stanford does not have elite speed at WR or a QB like Davis Mills who can drop dimes to make an opponent hold back a safety. Defenses are going to load up to stop the run and try to force Stanford into 3rd and long. It's been a formula for opponent success for several years. I have heard stories that opponent coaches think that Stanford's offense is relatively easy to prepare for.


So the questions are 1) Can the QB play at an elevated level to keep defenses honest? 2) Can the coaches put the offense in good positions to be successful? I have my doubts about both but I sure hope to be surprised.

Stanford's been "easy to prepare for" because it's thin on elite football athletes in the trenches and D-backfield. These were the nasty guys who won the Orange Bowl and the Rose Bowls. The so-called skill positions have always drawn the attention and the oohs an aahs of the die-hard cheerleaders but without the carnivores -- the "connective tissue" of big-time teams -- you fall short. Get this kind of talent back in the mix and pretty good QBs can look stellar. Without them, those same QBs (and RBs and WRs) will always struggle. Oversimplified analysis, of course, but still valid. It's a pretty simple game. Regardless of how complex your playbook is.

[gailtate]

My $0.02 on the offense.

Like many, I really like the OL position group. A couple of those guys have a little nasty streak. I like seeing them play with a chip on their shoulder.
⁠
But even with the experience and capability of the OLine, Stanford will have to show that it can run when opponents bring 7 or 8 (or even 9) defenders into the box to stop it. When Stanford runs plays with Heimuli and Fisk on the field, it's almost assuredly a run. Stanford does not have elite speed at WR or a QB like Davis Mills who can drop dimes to make an opponent hold back a safety. Defenses are going to load up to stop the run and try to force Stanford into 3rd and long. It's been a formula for opponent success for several years. I have heard stories that opponent coaches think that Stanford's offense is relatively easy to prepare for.


So the questions are 1) Can the QB play at an elevated level to keep defenses honest? 2) Can the coaches put the offense in good positions to be successful? I have my doubts about both but I sure hope to be surprised.

Stanford's been "easy to prepare for" because it's thin on elite football athletes in the trenches and D-backfield. These were the nasty guys who won the Orange Bowl and the Rose Bowls. The so-called skill positions have always drawn the attention and the oohs an aahs of the die-hard cheerleaders but without the carnivores -- the "connective tissue" of big-time teams -- you fall short. Get this kind of talent back in the mix and pretty good QBs can look stellar. Without them, those same QBs (and RBs and WRs) will always struggle. Oversimplified analysis, of course, but still valid. It's a pretty simple game. Regardless of how complex your playbook is.