[msqueri]

* On conference affiliation, "I trust our leadership, wherever that is" sounded to me like Stanford's future in the college football firmament was part of his conversations with university leadership and either we don't know where it's headed or there's a good chance it's not the Pac-12. The main clue here is how fully he leaned in to a frame of argument that minimized the importance of conference and emphasized that Stanford is Stanford and will remain Stanford. It's also possible he's just slickly pivoting to the good PR message, but it caught my attention. The wishful thinker in me continues to hear comments like this and hope Stanford football's future can be brighter joining USC in the Big 10. There's another way to read this that Taylor has reason to believe Stanford is going independent or contemplating dropping down (to the extent he's minimizing the importance of conference affiliation). What does seem clear to me is that it seems unlikely Taylor would have answered this way if status quo writing was on the wall.

* The media love the Patu/Folsom angle. Fair enough. It's interesting. Taylor is an offensive-minded coach whose QB just left for the NFL and whose heir apparent went (can't really say played!) at the high school at which Taylor became a legend. Yeah, it's a story. But I always judge spontaneous comments as more meaningful than politic answers to leading questions. Just not sure what, if anything, we can read into the answer on Patu. Good that Taylor emphasized competition, but what else was he going to do? Based on track record, a role for both Patu and Daniels very plausibly could be in the cards, but it's also the case that based on the new landscape in college football the whole thing could be shuffled by an incoming transfer. My general posture is it's too early right now to talk authoritatively about Stanford's 2023 position competitions and a reporter asking Taylor about Patu doesn't change that.

* I'm going to try to wait for more data points before assessing how I feel about Taylor's orientation toward self-selectors and the types of players he'll recruit to Stanford. That's been my two decade long obsession and I'll surely be paying attention to how Taylor talks and acts in this regard. At first blush the way he talked about the draw recruits have to Stanford resonated with me, but it's quite possible (probably really) I'm still on an anybody but Shaw high. Basically, I don't know if I'm in the frame of mind to objectively evaluate some of these comments.

* I watched a lot of David Shaw over the last 15 years. A lot. My psycho-analyzing was therefore based on a lot of data points and a lot of comparing rhetoric versus reality. I don't have any of that with Troy Taylor. I'm sure some of my attempts at observations are bogus at this early stage. But it's fun to try to get to know this new coach and assess whether he might fix what ails us. Clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose!

[msqueri]

* On conference affiliation, "I trust our leadership, wherever that is" sounded to me like Stanford's future in the college football firmament was part of his conversations with university leadership and either we don't know where it's headed or there's a good chance it's not the Pac-12. The main clue here is how fully he leaned in to a frame of argument that minimized the importance of conference and emphasized that Stanford is Stanford and will remain Stanford. It's also possible he's just slickly pivoting to the good PR message, but it caught my attention. The wishful thinker in me continues to hear comments like this and hope Stanford football's future can be brighter joining USC in the Big 10. There's another way to read this that Taylor has reason to believe Stanford is going independent or contemplating dropping down (to the extent he's minimizing the importance of conference affiliation). What does seem clear to me is that it seems unlikely Taylor would have answered this way if status quo writing was on the wall.

* The media love the Patu/Folsom angle. Fair enough. It's interesting. Taylor is an offensive-minded coach whose QB just left for the NFL and whose heir apparent went (can't really say played!) at the high school at which Taylor became a legend. Yeah, it's a story. But I always judge spontaneous comments as more meaningful than politic answers to leading questions. Just not sure what, if anything, we can read into the answer on Patu. Good that Taylor emphasized competition, but what else was he going to do? Based on track record, a role for both Patu and Daniels very plausibly could be in the cards, but it's also the case that based on the new landscape in college football the whole thing could be shuffled by an incoming transfer. My general posture is it's too early right now to talk authoritatively about Stanford's 2023 position competitions and a reporter asking Taylor about Patu doesn't change that.

* I'm going to try to wait for more data points before assessing how I feel about Taylor's orientation toward self-selectors and the types of players he'll recruit to Stanford. That's been my two decade long obsession and I'll surely be paying attention to how Taylor talks and acts in this regard. At first blush the way he talked about the draw recruits have to Stanford resonated with me, but it's quite possible (probably really) I'm still on an anybody but Shaw high. Basically, I don't know if I'm in the frame of mind to objectively evaluate some of these comments.

* I watched a lot of David Shaw over the last 15 years. A lot. My psycho-analyzing was therefore based on a lot of data points and a lot of comparing rhetoric versus reality. I don't have any of that with Troy Taylor. I'm sure some of my attempts at observations are bogus at this early stage. But it's fun to try to get to know this new coach and assess whether he might fix what ails us. Clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose!